[Election-Methods] Matrix voting and cloneproof MMP questions

[raphfrk at netscape.net]

 Again, sorry if there are ?'s where there shouldn't be.

From: James Gilmour <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>
> It is also an unsafe
> assumption that every first preference vote for a
> particular candidate is a "party vote" for that candidate's party.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
I think this is a very important point.? Under PR-STV, the voters elect
candidates not parties.? A popular candidate can get elected even if the
party he is part of is not liked much (and likewise a less popular candidate
from a popular party can end up not getting elected.)
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
Party list systems assume that there is only 1 type of voter and that voter
votes purely based on party support.? However, in practice there is a mix
of voters who vote based on candidate and voters who vote based on party.
PR-STV allows both kinds of voters to vote the way they want to and combines
their vote in a fair way.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
> There is always a trade-off between guaranteed local representation (small
> districts) and proportionality (large districts),
> whatever the voting system.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
Local representation isn't that important.? The benefit that is called
'local representation' is the ability of the voters to directly control
their representative.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
Under a party list system, the voters exert control on a party and thus only
indirectly on the members of the party.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
Under PR-STV and single seaters, they voters exert control directly on the
elected members.? Each member must personally get enough votes if he is to
be elected.? The voters know specifically which candidate represents them.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
> While STV-PR, as normally implemented, might reduce
> the effective threshold to gain representation for
> parties nationally,
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
I assume that you mean 'increase' not 'reduce'?
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
> that loss has to be set against the gains for the voters of
> more localised representation and of shifting the
> balance of power and accountability from the parties to the voters.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
Right.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
However, ignoring logistics, PR-STV with a single constituency would not
have any tradeoff.? There would be (near) perfect PR and each voter would
be directly represented by someone they choose.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
The logistics ofc are the big problem.? I think a reasonable compromise would
be to have local candidates only on the ballot and have spaces for write in
codes for all candidates in the country.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
Maybe, each candidate would be allowed to pick which polling stations that he
is on the ballot for.? The limit could be polling stations covering around
4-5 seats worth of voters.? This limit might be increased for candidates
who were already elected or managed to reach a threshold in a previous election.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 
In effect, each candidate would create his own district., so gerrymandering becomes
less relevant.



 


Raphfrk
--------------------
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"

www.wikocracy.com

 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20080716/f8812298/attachment-0003.htm>