[EM] Representational government

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

>From: Andy Brown <sjbrown at toybox.geeky.net>
>Reply-To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
>To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
>Subject: [EM] Representational government
>Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:52:46 -0800
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [204.122.16.48] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id 
>MHotMailBBF2CD9500A440043163CC7A10300F5C0; Sat Dec 02 15:15:35 2000
>Received: (from smartlst at localhost)by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id 
>PAA10809;Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:12:37 -0800
>From election-methods-list-request at eskimo.com Sat Dec 02 15:16:17 2000
>X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: robla owned process doing -bs
>X-Received: (from smartlst at localhost)by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id 
>LAA12541for robla at eskimo.com; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:52:46 -0800
>Old-X-Envelope-From: sjbrown at toybox.geeky.net  Fri Dec  1 11:52:44 2000
>X-Received: from toybox.geeky.net (toybox.geeky.net [209.167.74.178])by 
>mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA12483for 
><election-methods-list at eskimo.com>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:52:43 -0800
>X-Received: from localhost (sjbrown at localhost)by toybox.geeky.net 
>(8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28953for <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>; 
>Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:52:43 -0500
>Old-Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:52:43 -0500 (EST)
>In-Reply-To: <3A27FC0C.A04D508D at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de>
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0012011440490.22533-100000 at toybox.geeky.net>
>Old-X-Envelope-To: election-methods-list
>ReSent-Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:12:26 -0800 (PST)
>ReSent-From: Rob Lanphier <robla at eskimo.com>
>ReSent-To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
>ReSent-Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1001202151226.11551D at eskimo.com>
>X-Mailing-List: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com> archive/latest/4711
>X-Loop: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
>Precedence: list
>Resent-Sender: election-methods-list-request at eskimo.com
>
>(Slightly Off-topic)
>
>We here in Canada have just had a federal election.  The way it works in
>canada is as follows: each "Riding" (geographically bounded area with a
>certain population) elects an Member of Parliament (equivalent to member
>of the HoR) The political party with the most MPs in parliament gets to
>have it's Leader be the Prime Minister.  (No electoral college or any such
>nonsense ;)
>
>I voted for a person who did not win.  So now my MP, whose job it is to
>represent my riding, is someone I do not approve of.  This got me
>thinking... wouldn't it be nice if, during a vote in parliament, each MPs
>vote counted only as much as the number of people who voted for him -- ie,
>the number of people whom he actually represents?
>
>So for example, if there is a vote in parliament on the Widget Tax, One MP
>votes yea, and that is given a score of 20,000, and anoter MP votes nay
>and that is given a score of, say 15,000.
>
>Has anyone ever heard of a system where each MP has a different
>weight?  I'd really like to do further research on this topic, look at
>some of the problems such as regional representation, and such.
>
>andy

Yes, that's often proposed, probably the most often proposed
solution to the problem that you've described. It's very often proposed
by voters, but the proportional representation advocates don't like
it, and try to brush it off as unwinnable. How can they say that
it's less winnable when it, and not their proportional schemes, is
what voters have proposed so often? Good question. This is an
example of why it's sometimes necessary to go around, and past,
those who have the conceit to believe that they're our leaders.

Mike Ossipoff


>



_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com