[EM] Proxy

[Curt Siffert]

Adam,
That's really cool.  The flaw to other schemes that I keep bumping my 
head against is that proportional representation disenfranchises the 
people below the cutoff point, even though their views might still be 
valuable.  But DD by itself isn't good either because it just gets so 
unwieldy in the drafting process.  A bicameral solutions like this 
seems like an elegant way to solve that catch-22.

This way a Senate could pass something that largely reflects the 
consensus that elected them, but the population has an exceptional 
reason to oppose it, they could proxy against it on demand.

One thing I'd want to tinker with.  I like proportional representation 
because it reflects the population (above the cutoff), and each Senator 
has equal voting power.  However, I don't like the part where each 
voter doesn't have a direct link to their Senator (even though that's 
handled in the House in this scenario).  So I'd want a way for the 
voter to still have more direct control over who fills their party's 
seats, like through a multi-winner ranked ballot.  "If my first choice 
is guaranteed to have a slot, then make my vote count for my second 
choice."  Then I wonder if there's a good way for each voter to know 
who "their" Senator is.

What I like about schemes like this is that it can be applied by a 
software-driven web process for online communities.

Curt

On May 15, 2004, at 6:59 PM, Adam Tarr wrote:
>
> How about this:
>
> - Bicameral legislature.  I'll call the two houses "senate" and 
> "house" but this is just for identification purposes.
>
> - The "senate" is elected by a PR method.  The "senate" would act like 
> a normal legislative body, meeting in committees, drafting 
> legislation, and voting to pass it.  The only "tweak" would be that it 
> would be unusually easy to pass legislation - maybe only requiring 35% 
> or 40% of the vote.
>
> - the "house" would be a direct democracy using a proxy system.  The 
> House would not debate or draft legislation - it would only vote on 
> legislation (requiring the usual majority to pass).  If there is an 
> executive veto, only the house needs to vote to override it.  (Or 
> perhaps a 2/3 vote is considered "veto-proof".)
>
> Basically, I'd put professional politicians in the senate in charge of 
> drafting laws, but the real up-and-down decisions are made by the 
> people (the "house") in as direct a fashion as possible.  To me, this 
> seems like the best of both worlds.
>
> -Adam
>
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list 
> info
>