[EM] 12/22/02 - Markus Schulze Wrote and Wrote again:

[Donald E Davison]

12/22/02 - Markus Schulze Wrote and Wrote again:

Dear Markus,

I agree with your selection of IRV being the best single-seat method, but I
disagree on district STV being the best multi-seat method.

Years ago you wrote:  "I think, that the aim of proportional representation
is to minimize the number of the wasted votes."

On Dec 17, 2002 you wrote: "In my opinion, the best multi-winner method in
use today is Northern Ireland's fractional version of proportional
representation by the single transferable vote."     Markus Schulze


Donald here,  These two quotes by you are in conflict.  I will agree with
you on your first quote, but Northern Ireland's method does not meet your
aim of PR, for it has a large amount of wasted votes.

Correct me if I am wrong, but if I remember correctly, Northern Ireland's
multi-winner method is a district STV method, which means that because of
the use of the Droop quota in each district there will be a quota of wasted
votes in each district which can add up to a total of twenty percent wasted
votes for the entire jurisdiction.  If the election method had no districts
then there would only be one quota of votes wasted.  As a district method,
STV has too many wasted votes, but this is not the only problem with
district STV,

A claim of PR methods, STV and Party List, is that ten percent of the
voters will be able to elect ten percent of the members.  This will not be
true for district STV.  Ten percent of the voters will not be able to elect
any members if they are spread evenly in the jurisdiction.  They may be
able to elect one if they happen to have a large group of their supporters
in one district.

District STV has this added problem because there is no linkage between the
party proportionality in the district and the party proportionality in the
entire jurisdiction.

The only district method in use today that does have this linkage is top-up
Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP or MMPR).  In a MMP election,
ten percent of the entire jurisdiction will be able to elect ten percent of
the members.  MMP is able to give as good proportionality as single area
STV or Party List, but MMP also gives the voters a closer member-link
because of the small districts.

Now, I will say that MMP does have a few flaws, but nothing that cannot be
corrected if a jurisdiction is willing to change a few rules of MMP, but in
spite of these few flaws, MMP is still the best district method in use
today and is also the best multi-seat method if the close member-link is
important to the people of a jurisdiction.


Because you have claimed the Northern Ireland method to be the best, I am
going to assume that you know enough about the method to be able to tell us
some details, like total number of seats and how many districts (if it is a
district method).

If you would be so kind as to give us that information, we will be able to
calculate how many wasted votes there will be in the method.

Thank you,




Regards,
   Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald
                        Candidate Election Methods
   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
   |                        Q U O T A T I O N                          |
   |  "Democracy is a beautiful thing,                                 |
   |        except that part about letting just any old yokel vote."   |
   |                           - Age 10 -                              |
   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

         Please be advised that sending email to me allows me to
         quote from it and/or forward the entire email to others.






















----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em