[Election-Methods] Local representation

[James Gilmour]

Juho  > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:18 PM
> I think already the basic open list provides a quite strong link  
> between candidates and voters. 

Yes, it is certainly much stronger than with closed-list.  But see next proviso.


> Voters will decide which candidates  
> will be elected, not the party (this is an important detail).  

This will be true only when there is no facility to cast a "party vote" rather than a vote for a named candidate.  Some (many?
most?) open-list systems allow the "party vote" option, when such votes are allocated to candidates in the order the party ranked
the list.  Experience shows that where this option is provided it is used by large numbers of voters and so negates the purpose of
the open list..


> (Extensions are needed to provide proportionality between different  
> subgroups of the party.)

Now you have made open-list party-list MUCH more complicated.  The most effective way of doing this is to allow transfers of votes
among candidates within each party's list.  But then you are so close to proper STV-PR that you might as well go all the way and
allow the voter full freedom to mark the preferences in any order he or she wishes, not just within one party list.  (But NO option
for "above-the-line" voting.)

James

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1557 - Release Date: 17/07/2008 05:36