[EM] Apportionment bias

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 11:39 PM 12/10/2006, Warren Smith wrote:
>  claim by this same (standard) definition, all other apportionment
>methods so far discussed, generically exhibit bias.

Note that Asset Voting with precinct-based vote transfers produces 
virtual districts and practically exact proportional representation, 
some of which would be effectively multimember districts, with no 
bias at all. (Or, more accurately, the "bias" is that the 
gerrymandering is done by the voters through their proxies, the 
candidates they vote for.)

(It is PR because any faction of voters who care to act as a faction 
can create seats belonging to the faction. But it also represents 
independent, non-affiliated voters. Essentially, the "factions" are 
those supporting a particular candidate or set of candidates. This is 
far more sophisticated than anything else I've seen proposed. It 
makes Range Voting, per se, not necessary for representative 
elections; Range still makes sense for single-winner officer elections.)