[EM] PR in student government...

[David Cary]

--- Tim Hull <timhull2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> As a result, I'm looking at proportional representation systems -
> and possibly introducing one as a ballot initiative for next year.
> However, I have experienced great trouble in finding a system that 
> people like.  Single Transferable Vote seems ideal, but it has the 
> drawback of being complex (and, as a result, hard for people to 
> comprehend).  Party lists are simpler, but they force voters to 
> support an entire party - not ideal at all.

Tim, 

I see two problems here:
  1) Succumbing to the perspective that the complexity of tabulating
votes is or should be a primary point for evaluating an election
method. 
  2) Believing that STV is difficult for people to understand.

Focus on current problems and the benefits of change.  Focus on the
big picture, the failures of flawed student governance.  What are the
problems on campus that resonate with students?   That is where the
gold mine of persuasion lies.

It should be easy enough to find problems with party dominated
politics, even more so with single-party dominated politics.  Borda
election methods are clearly implicated.  For example, Borda methods
disproprotionately reward having similar candidates run.  

I'm guessing that unlike twenty or thirty years ago, student votes
are being tabulated by computer now and that students may even be
vote electronically.  On this scale, the logistical benefits of using
Borda, as a summable method, never outweighed its flaws, and with
current technologies, the logistical benefits simply evaporate.

When they need it, give people an appropriately tailored explanation
of STV.   The general rule is to keep it simple and short, especially
at first.  In that regard, voting experts sometimes give the worst
explanations.  When someone wants a drink, don't give them a
firehose.  It doesn't work.  

When you talk about features of STV, always relate them back to the
problems of the current system and the benefits of making a change.

STV can be explained to just about anyone in 2 minutes or less. 
Whether it is a 12 year-old student or someone with a Ph.D., after
two minutes, they can walk away with an understanding of key points
about not only why it is good, but how it is done. Much of that can
be packaged into even shorter messages.

You do have some advantages. Students already have experience voting
with ranked ballots.  Students also aren't committed to the current
system simply because it is the way it has always been done or
because they think it is the only way there is to do elections. 

The real challenge is developing a message that will convince the
beneficiaries of the current system that they should support making a
change.  Some changes may just have to start at a grassroots level.

-- David Cary


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com