[EM] Hare Voting and a new plan for its use:

[Donald E. Davison]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-06-00
Greetings List,

   I am now using the term Hare Voting to mean STV less its negative design
features. There is just too much misunderstanding otherwise.
   And, I would like to propose a plan in which to use Hare Voting in
elections that cover large areas, like large states or large countries.
Large elections should be divided into small districts, but having small
districts is one of the negative design features of STV. The solution is to
have sub-districts within Greater Districts.

    The plan could work like the folowing:
    We take ten current Single-Seat districts and combined them into one
Greater District, which is inturn divided into five sub-districts.
    Only one vote per person, but the voters have optional ranking of
candidates and/or parties in any mix.
    The only candidates a voter can vote for are the candidates running in
the local sub-district, but he can rank any party that has at least one
candidate running somewhere in the Greater District.
    An independent candidate is treated the same as a political party, that
is, a voter can rank any independent candidate running anywhere in the
Greater District.
    All the votes of all five sub-districts are added together to yield the
first count of the ballots for the Greater District. The party votes are
divided evenly between all candidates of the same party.
    The election method will be Hare Voting.
    When party votes are transferred, they are transferred evenly to the
remaining members of the same party. In the event there are no candidates
of the party remaining in contention, then the vote goes to the next
choice, whatever that may be, candidate or another party.
    This design gives the people their Member-Link, but the member is
elected in the proportionality of ten seats, which makes the plan a
positive design feature.
    Small states could have one Greater District cover the entire state.
    Counties could also use only one Greater District, or use only one
sub-district, a single area election, but still allow voting for candidates
and/or parties in any mix.

Regards, Donald Davison