[EM] electoral methods - US and Europe

[Forest Simmons]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Toplak Jurij wrote:

> I am finishing an article on apportionment/seat allocation and I would like to make some things clear. Please correct me if I am wrong in any of the facts below. I also would apreciate any comment on this, because I find it quite strange.
>
> I understand that in 19th century European scientists were not aware of American research. But what really surprises me is that in 1990 European research and even American Political Science research did not know (at list they don't cite it) that it has all been invented already. Therefore:
>
> 1. Jefferson Method (1791) was reinvented in Europe by Victor D'Hondt (1878).
> 2. Hamilton Method (1791) was reinvented in Europe by Hare.
> 3. Webster Method (1832) was reinvented in Europe by Saint-Lague.
> 4. The discussion about the "most proportional" method followed in Europe, too, and...
>
> 5. American National Academy of Sciences in 1920 concuded that none of the methods is "most" proportional, because it all depends on how we measure the discrepancies from ideal proportionality.
> European research came to exactly same conclusion around 1985-1991 without even mentioning the one from 1920.
> (see Gallagher (1991). Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems. Electoral Studies 10:1, 33-51. Something also Lijphard (1985)The Field of Electoral Systems Research: A Critical Survey. Electoral Studies 4:1, 3-14).
>
> I'll be grateful for any comments.
>
> Jure

How about the current US method, the Huntington Hill method.  What do the
Europeans call it? Or is it still in the future?

I'm sure that if Bush stays in power long enough, the rest of the world
will be made over in our image [the image of the beast?] including the
inch, foot, yard, pound, fluid ounce, bushel, peck, etc.

Forest