[Election-Methods] Local representation

[Juho]

On Jul 17, 2008, at 20:14 , Diego Santos wrote:

> 2008/7/17 James Gilmour <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>:
>> Diego Santos  > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:32 PM
>>> 2008/7/17  <raphfrk at netscape.net>:
>>>> The main issue is the party list vs PR-STV question.  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.
>>
>>
>>> It is not always true. Open list PR keeps the relation
>>> between the candidate and the voter.
>>
>> This is true only of the most complicated versions of open-list  
>> party-list PR voting systems.  Most open-list party-list voting
>> systems do not give PR within each party.  The relation between  
>> the candidate and the voter is remote.
>>
>> James Gilmour
>
> Although intra-party proportionality is not guaranteed by simple OLPR
> systems, the relation candidate/voter is not so remote in many
> scenarios. For example, in the last elections for Brazilian Chamber of
> Deputies, 68% of non-spoiled ballots in my multi-member district are
> for elected candidates. I don't think the outcome would be too
> different if this election was performed using STV.

And the votes to non-elected candidates go to the party anyway, so  
one knows who one's second favourite was even if the vote didn't list  
that candidate by name and thereby contribute to electing him/her. In  
STV the voter knows to whom the vote went if the first preference  
candidate was not elected. But since this is a secret that only the  
voter knows the difference between the two cases is not big.

Juho




		
___________________________________________________________ 
Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The Wall Street Journal 
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html