[EM] Re: STV is suppose to be a PR method.

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

Mr. Schulze wrote in part-

suppose that there are 5 seats and 100 voters so that
the Hare Quota is 20. Suppose that party A nominates
candidate A1, A2, and A3 and that party B nominates
candidate B1, B2, and B3. Suppose that every voter
makes a full ranking of all six candidates and that
52% of the voters prefer every candidate of party A
to every candidate of party B and that 48% of the
voters prefer every candidate of party B to every
candidate of party A.

Then it could happen that candidate A1 and A2 each
get 20% of the first preferences, that candidate A3
gets 12% of the first preferences, and that candidate
B1, B2, and B3 each get 16% of the first preferences.
STV with the Hare Quota would elect candidate A1 and A2,
then eliminate candidate A3, and then elect candidate
B1, B2, and B3 so that party A gets 2 seats for 52% of
the votes and party B gets 3 seats for 48% of the votes.
---
D- 

Party A has 5 x 0.52 = 2.6 
Party B has 5 x 0.48 = 2.4

Using the method of equal proportions--

Party A gets 3 seats
Party B gets 2 seats.

Using proxy voting--

A1 20
A2 20
A3 12
One of B1, B2, B3 loses using a lottery (since 16 each first choices).
Assume B1 loses.
There might be
B2  21
B3  27

    100

How many times do I have to repeat ?? --- Both simple Hare and simple Droop 
have major problems with unequal Votes/Seats ratios (especially with a low 
number of votes and/or seats).

Many (if not all) legislative bodies do NOT need have a large number of seats 
with proxy p.r. to represent the major groups of voters in the area involved.

When does a legislative body become mob sized and subject to monarchial/ 
oligarchial leadership controls (such as the U.S. House of Representatives - 
435 members -- wherein the Speaker and a few of the senior members of the 
majority faction control the agenda) ???