Proposed MMP ballot initiative in Colorado

[Gary Swing]

On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, Olli Salmi wrote:

> Not bad. The voters have some say over the party list so I think this is
> better than the New Zealand system. I have a couple of questions:
> 
> >(7) Party seat allocation shall be determined by the largest remainder
> >formula.
> 
> Why do you use the largest remainder method? It produces erratic results.
> Why not use Sainte-Lague/Webster?
> http://www.barnsdle.demon.co.uk/vote/appor.html

Largest remainder is simplest to explain.
 
> >(9) The slate ballots of each party list shall be credited to the first
> >candidates on the list, just enough to each, to bring his or her total up
> >to the party seat allocation threshold.
> 
> Candidates who poll at least the quota (=party seat allocation threshold)
> are elected. The rest of the seats go to the the top names on the party
> lists. Have I understood correctly?

The revised filing has personal ballots counted first, if that's what you
mean.

If you mean that there shouldn't be pre-ordered lists, the reasoning here
is that 1) many voters may prefer to cast a simple vote for their party
rather than ranking numerous individual candidates; and 2) it preserves
the right of association for political party organizations to nominate the
candidates named on their lists.
 
> I would let the personal ballots decide the order of election.

Gary Swing