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

[James Gilmour]

Donald wrote:
> 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.

This is only a problem if you think it's a problem.  In practice most electors
readily accept a trade-off between locality and overall proportionality.  In any
case, you seem to have an obsession with "party proportionality".  There is much
more to political representation than party proportionality.  Proportionality
WITHIN parties is just as important as proportionality BETWEEN or AMONG parties.

> 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.

These comments make me suspect you have no personal experience of MMP.  It has two
serious flaws that no amount of tinkering will cure.  First, it achieves PR only
of political parties and similar pre-registered groups.  It does not and cannot
give PR within parties, nor can it give the voters the opportunity to achieve PR
of anything other than the registered parties and groups.  Second, it creates two
very different kinds of elected members - those elected from single-member
constituencies and those elected on a regional or national basis from the parties'
top-up lists.  The effect of electing two very different types of representative
may vary with the local political culture, but here in Scotland and also in New
Zealand, it has had a very bad effect on the Parliament.

It is a sick joke to suggest that any form of MMP creates a "close member-link".
The closest and strongest link between the elected members and the voters is
obtained with STV-PR, because with STV-PR each elected member is the personal
choice of a "constituency" of voters.  They voted the member in, and they can
voted that member out - and they can do it without having to vote against their
preferred party.  That is real voter power.  That creates the really strong link.
If you have any doubts, just ask the politicians who are on the receiving end of
such voter power where STV-PR is in use.

James

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