[Election-Methods] Partisan Politics

[Juho]

On Mar 17, 2008, at 3:02 , Fred Gohlke wrote:

> re: "As you can see my concerns and possible improvements that I'd  
> like
> to study are mainly in the areas of privacy of the votes and in
> proportional representation."
>
> As far as I'm concerned, the voting process should be secret.
> Obviously, if one person gets two votes, it is obvious how the  
> other two
> people voted.  Until then, I see no reason why one should be  
> required to
> divulge their vote.

I prefer secret votes in political elections since that allows voters  
to give their sincere opinions better. The problem is just that in  
groups of three one can not expect one's vote to remain secret, and  
that may impact one's voting behaviour.

> Isn't proportional representation a party concept; the idea that one
> group of partisans should have a number of representatives  
> proportional
> to their part of the electorate?  As long as you think parties are
> necessary, you will have to seek that goal.  The Active Democracy
> concept does much better:  Each person elected represents the same
> number of people ... and I think people are more important than  
> parties,
> by a long shot.

Proportional representation is in a way a "party concept" (but not  
necessarily one that would strengthen the party control in the way  
that you described as negative.

PR can also be applied to areas. Eg. the number of representatives  
from each state can be in proportion to the number of citizens there.

PR may make the voters and their different opinions better  
represented in the way that it allows also small groups to have their  
voice heard by giving them a small number of representatives.

There are also PR methods like STV that do not assume a party  
structure (maybe that would appeal to you). It is however possible  
that a party structure will emerge (or stay) even if the method  
itself would not recognize any such structure among the candidates.  
This may apply to your method too. I think also you felt that this is  
natural and good if not too strong / power seeking.

One way of allowing richer set of opinions than what large monolithic  
parties would provide is to allow a hierarchy of opinions (smaller  
groupings within a party etc.).

I do not "seek the goal" of making parties dominant but I find it  
natural (and to some extent even unavoidable) that people do group  
together with other similar minded people. Also voters may prefer to  
see some structure in the potentially vast array of candidates that  
they need to choose from.

Juho





		
___________________________________________________________ 
Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html