Yes, in the California example in particular, I'm pretty confident of that. That's helpful.
Of course, the concern you've probably heard here is a public choice problem with having the interested parties make the decision as to what system should be adopted. The argument that my party has been presenting is that the safeguard to prevent the interested parties from designing a system for the purpose of determining the outcome of the next election is to require that the citizens approve it. It would force us all to design something that meets with voter approval, or else we would have to suffer through another election under the current system.
Is my public choice concern, in your view, a legitimate concern, or am I imagining something that's not a real threat?