[Election-Methods] Local representation

[Juho]

On Jul 17, 2008, at 18:38 , raphfrk at netscape.net wrote:

> > I can see three different local/personal representation concepts  
> here. (just to clarify my thoughts, and maybe help some others too)
>
> I think a better way of breaking down those options would be based  
> on the how the seats are allocated.
> The whole regional/national/district issue is separate.  Ofc, for  
> single seaters, it has to be district based.
>
> The main issue is the party list vs PR-STV question.

My naming of the three concepts was quite confusing. Another way to  
name them is 1) direct and and known official link between the  
representative and a set of voters, 2) regional proportionality and  
3) personally selected representative (typically secret, known only  
by the voter).

I left political/ideological/party proportionality out for the most  
part and focused only on the regional proportionality and established  
links between the voter and the representative.

> The problem is that a party list system breaks
> the link between the candidate and the elected member.  Party  
> members must remain loyal to the
> party as the party has all the power.

(Diego Santos already noted that open lists keep some clear links  
between the voters and the candidates.)

> However, even if you didn't vote for him.  He will still likely try  
> to help you.

Yes. In some set-ups one could considered it to be a benefit of the  
system not to have a fixed/known relationship between the voters and  
representatives.

....STV-PR...
> larger parties not wanting to
> increase the average number of seats per district.

This sounds like an intentional threshold (implemented using small  
size districts).

Juho



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20080717/2207dd62/attachment-0003.htm>