[EM] 12/22/02 - Markus Schulze Wrote and Wrote again:

[Adam Tarr]

Markus Schulze wrote:

>The aim of proportional representation is to minimize the number of wasted
>votes. However, proportionality is not the only criterion for a good multi-
>winner method. I prefer PR-STV to PR-PL because STV makes it possible for
>independent candidates to get elected. I consider this aspect important
>because I believe that the power of the party machines depends mainly on
>the chances of the candidates to get elected without the support or even
>against the will of their party.

While I agree wholeheartedly with the desire to limit the influence 
political parties have over their candidates, it seems to me that this is 
mostly a property of CLOSED party list PR.  In open list PR, candidates 
don't have to play nice to move up the list, since the voters decide which 
candidates on the list get elected.  Also, in theory one could run as an 
independent in list PR, although it's unlikely that a single candidate 
would break the quota.  So I do see the benefits of STV.  I see PAV as even 
better, though - especially if there aren't many seats to allocate.

-Adam


----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em