MMP defector MP - info

[Bjørn Erik Rasch]

Below the following is said: "The issue also applies to the Closed Party
List form of PR, and to any system where the voters vote for parties
instead of
people." The last part of the sentence is a misunderstanding. Voters vote
for persons also in closed list PR-systems (but if you want to vote for
party A, this party make up the list of persons to vote entirely on its
own; the voters cannot interfere at election day). Furthermore,
representatives are never constitutionally tied to their party; they are --
formally -- free to follow their "consciusness" or even to change party
during the election term. 

b.e.rasch at stv.uio.no





At 11:43 30.07.97 -0800, you wrote:
>Tom R wrote:
>>>Hi Marcus. I've got a request for information for you ... I
>>>recently read in the newspaper here that there's some
>>>controversy in NZ because an MP elected for one party has
>>>defected to another. It's apparently particularly controversial
>>>because she was elected for a list seat, 
>[snip]
>
>Donald D replied:
>>      If there has been any exchange of views by anyone I
>> would like to be privy to them. I am interested in that aspect
>> of MMP.
>
>The issue also applies to the Closed Party List form of PR, and
>to any system where the voters vote for parties instead of
>people.
>
>One might also raise the issue even in systems where voters 
>vote for people, since the candidates' party affiliations are 
>signals used by many voters in deciding how to vote.  In a 
>sense, the legislator has committed something akin to electoral 
>fraud.
>
>Solutions are straightforward, if they're embedded in the 
>constitution.  For example, a majority or supermajority of a 
>party's legislators could be given power to expel a legislator 
>who quits that party if s/he was a member of it when elected.  
>For another example, the expulsion could be automatic.
>
>The only problem with these "solutions" is that if they were 
>part of the system, the legislator would simply avoid officially 
>changing his/her party, and would merely informally make it 
>clear to his/her new party that s/he is going to vote with them 
>most of the time.
>
>The only real solution, I think, is to allow the voters to vote
>frequently.  Then if they no longer prefer to be represented by
>the turncoat they can change their votes. This solution would
>hopefully be part of an electoral system with low campaign
>costs, such as giving free t.v. and radio time to qualified
>candidates; otherwise the candidates' need for campaign money
>would corrupt policies even more than now, and rich parties
>would have an even larger advantage than now. 
>
>---Steve     (Steve Eppley    seppley at alumni.caltech.edu)
>
>
>