[EM] Question on RCV/IRV multi-seat method used in Minneapolis

[James Gilmour]

Raph Frank  > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 3:33 PM
> > On 9/24/08, James Gilmour <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > We have made some progress in this direction: we imposed STV-PR on 
> > Ireland in 1920,
> 
> Speaking as an Irish person, I am not sure that is accurate.  
> PR-STV was supported by the Irish side (partly because they 
> wanted a system that would reduce the unionist minority's 
> fears of a united Ireland) .  The British government may have 
> also supported it, but that just means that it was an area of 
> agreement, rather than them imposing it.

"Imposed" may have been a little strong.  What I wanted to convey was that the introduction of STV-PR for the two Parliaments and
local government elections in Ireland, North and South, was done a long time ago and was a decision of the British Parliament, at a
time when the British Parliament opposed its use for own elections (as it still does!!).  I have no doubt there was support for
STV-PR in Ireland, but there was also opposition, as the Unionist majority in Northern Ireland dumped STV-PR at the first
opportunity permitted under the Government of Ireland Act 1919.  I know the Proportional Representation Society of Great Britain and
Ireland (now the Electoral Reform Society) lobbied hard in both Ireland and London for STV-PR to be prescribed in the Government of
Ireland Bill.

> It is true that later FF tried to switch back to plurality 
> for the elections in the Republic, but that was purely a 
> power grab as they were starting to lose their easy majority 
> (and the voters blocked the change to the constitution).

Ralph makes a point here that gives the lie to claims that the principles of STV-PR are too complicated for ordinary electors to
understand.  When the government in Ireland twice tried to dump STV-PR, the ordinary electors twice said "No" in clear referendum
results, even though the legendary, popular President tied the second referendum to his own re-election.  The voters re-elected him
but still said "No" to his plan to dump STV-PR. The people understood the value of what STV-PR gave them and did not want the
British-style politics that FPTP (plurality in single-member districts) would have given them.  So take heart, all you who believe
our representative democracy can be improved!  It may take a long time to achieve electoral reform, but once "the people" have been
given control of the ballot box, through a sensitive voting system, they are not likely to hand that power back to the politicians
and party machines.

James

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.7.2/1689 - Release Date: 24/09/2008 18:51