[EM] A 48% Group elects 60% of the Droop Members
Bart Ingles
bartman at netgate.net
Sun Nov 14 16:06:43 PST 1999
I get different results; am I misapplying the quotas?
For a four-seat district with 1000 voters voting 600:400, I have both
factions receiving two seats each under Droop Quota:
Droop Quota = 1000/(4 + 1) + 1 = 201
Round 1: A=600, B=400; A wins 1st seat
Round 2: A=399, B=400; B wins 2nd seat
Round 3: A=399, B=199; A wins 3rd seat
Round 4: A=198, B=199; B wins 4th seat with 199 votes (2 shy of a
quota)
In the districts where B is ahead, the result is reversed but each group
still wins two seats per district, so 48% of the votes wins half of the
seats (i.e. 50 seats each). I get the same result with Hare:
Under Hare Quota, the quota is 2000/4 = 250, so
Round 1: A=600, B=400; A wins 1st seat
Round 2: A=350, B=400; B wins 2nd seat
Round 3: A=350, B=150; A wins 3rd seat
Round 4: A=100, B=150; B wins 2nd seat with 150 votes (100 shy of a
quota)
If you change the vote slightly from 600:400 to 601:399, then the larger
groups will win 3 seats in a given district under Droop and 2 seats
under Hare. So the 52% group will win (3 * 15) + (1 * 10) = 55 seats
and the 48% group will win 45 seats under Droop, vs. 50/50 under Hare.
The differences don't seem earth-shattering either way. The only
difference I see is in a 4-seat district, you need > 60% to win 3 seats
under Droop, and > 62.5% under Hare. This takes you from 50% of the
seats to 75%.
Donald E Davison wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> The following is an example of a 48% group electing a majority of the
> Droop members.
>
> * 100 members are to be elected in 25 districts - 4 member districts.
>
> * 1000 voters per district - 25,000 total votes in election.
>
> * Droop Quota is 200 (1000/5)
>
> * The 48% group has 12,000 total votes - distributed as follows:
>
> The group has 600 votes in each of 10 districts.
> In which they are able to elect 3 members per district.
>
> And 400 votes in each of 15 districts.
> In which they are able to elect 2 members per district.
>
> * Total members elected by the 48% group is as follows:
>
> 10 districts electing 3 members each equals 30 members elected.
> 15 districts electing 2 members each equals 30 members elected.
> -----
> Total number of members elected by the 48% group: 60
> (60 of 100 is 60%)
>
> It is possible for a 48% group to elect 60% of the members.
> In a real election the numbers will not fall this even and the 48%
> group most likely will elect less, like 54% of the members, but still a
> majority.
>
> Had the count of this election used the Hare Quota, and the 48% group
> attempted to lower their votes on their candidates in order to elect more
> members than their just representation, we could expect that the number of
> members now elected by the 48% group would be less than using the Droop. I
> say less because the group will not be able to lower votes with
> mathematical precision. But, when the Droop Quota is imposed on the STV
> election method, by agreement of the Droop supporters, then the cheating
> can be preformed with mathematical precision, also by agreement of the
> Droop supporters.
> No matter which quota an election uses, for every member the 48% group
> elects over 48 members, some other group will lose a member.
>
> I claim that the real reason the Droop Quota has been made part of STV
> is so that the largest faction can elect a majority, even if that faction
> has less than a majority of the popular vote.
> The Droop is corruption - corruption by agreement.
>
> Note: I must point out that the main reason the 48% is able to elect 60% of
> the members in this example is because of the small districts. Had this
> election been held in One-Area of 100 seats, the 48% group would only been
> able to elect 48 members - using Hare or Droop, but the Droop makes it
> easier for the largest group to elect more members in small districts.
>
> Regards,
> Donald
>
> +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
> | 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 |
> +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
>
> N E W S L E T T E R
>
> Worldwide Direct Democracy Newsletter
> Four Issues per Year by Postal Mail
> Cost per year: Czech Republic 200 Kc, Europe 12 DM
> Outside of Europe $10
>
> Make check payable to: Mr. Bohuslav Binka
> Mail to: Mr. Bohuslav Binka
> Bellova 15
> Brno 623 00
> Czech Republic
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> N E W D E M O C R A C Y
> A Source of Study Material for Political Change
>
> http://www.mich.com/~donald
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list