[EM] parlimentary single-winner choices

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Josh wrote:

Has anyone written on the relation between multi-option voting
systems and parliamentary procedure?

I was thinking this morning... Why have votes on amendments at all?
All amendments and the bill itself could be voted on simultaneously. In that
context, you can wager your lunch they would want Approval or Condorcet, not
IRV. :)

Anyone know anything about this?

I reply:

People who study single-winner methods agree that it makes more
sense, and avoids proposal-order strategies, to vote on the
proposal and the status-quo, and the amendments to the proposal,
all in one balloting, using a good voting system.

But of course how things are done sometimes seems to be unrelated
to how things should be done.

Well, if we first get better people in Congress, which would happen
with better voting systems, then they could improve the choice methods
used in Congress.

But if anyone is in an organization that uses parliamentary
Sequential Pairwise, they should suggest Approval, Condorcet(wv),
or Bucklin (if members want rank-balloting but not computerization).

Mike Ossipoff


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx