[EM] Re: PR not representing median voter, and a system using best of PR and si

Dgamble997 at aol.com Dgamble997 at aol.com
Fri Jul 25 09:13:22 PDT 2003

Reply to Kevin Venzke and Rob Speer

Whilst using an electoral system ( for example Condorcet) which will tend to 
over represent the median voter is not the worst idea I've ever seen posted ( 
unlike "giving a veto to every voter in a certain central chunk" taken as 
read) it is still a pretty poor one. 

Votes cast by all voters are equally valid, of equal worth and should be 
treated so. The electoral system use should reflect this. Parties and groups 
should be represented in approximate proportion to the support they enjoy as 
measured by the votes cast. Nobody should be under or over represented. The median 
voter ( an increasingly vague and ill-defined term if you consider politics on 
more than a single left-centre-right dimension, different median voters for 
different issues) should be given no special consideration.

For most legislation a majority is all that is necessary for the legislation 
to be legitimate. For certain issues ( fundamental rights, amending a 
constitution, etc) where consensus is necessary, not meerly a bare majority, you 
should require 66.7% or 75% support. I'm pretty happy with the idea of 
constitutional checks and balances.

David Gamble 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20030725/5653bb15/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list