[EM] No geographical districts

Thu Sep 4 18:00:58 PDT 2008

Hello Juho,

using age, gender or other virtual dimension to build virtual districts
replaces geographic antagonism by generation antagonism.
The idea is to get equivalent sample that are not opposed by intrinsec 
construction.
Thus we may find neutral decision takers that will minimize the overall
bad impacts of a decision, thus maximize to the best of their knowledge
the decisions for all the electorate. If you split representative into 
groups who have divergent opinions, the result will not optimize common 
interest, it will only illustrate the "rapport de force"
(maybe translated as power struggle) between the representatives. Age 
representatives would hardly stay neutral while deciding retirement fees and 
pensions for example.

The Irish senate based on profession seems one step toward getting neutral 
decision takers
for deciding the localization of projects for example.
I prefer equivalent samples of the entire electorate (phone numbers or hash 
tables using names could work too, but it has some slight discrepancies and 
problems...)

>From: Juho <juho4880 at yahoo.co.uk>
>To: Election Methods Mailing List <election-methods at electorama.com>
>Subject: Re: [EM] No geographical districts
>Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 00:13:34 +0300
>
>Geographical proportionality is one specific dimension. Most other  
>dimensions could be called political dimensions. Also groupings that  do 
>not live in any specific compact area could be called political  groupings. 
>In principle they could form a party and that way get a  proportional 
>number of representatives. (This is also in line with  the geographical 
>proportionality related target of guaranteeing  representation from all 
>_geographic_ areas.)
>
>Many political systems have chosen geographical districts to be fixed  in 
>the sense that people automatically "vote" for the district where  they 
>live in. In the political dimension people are typically allowed  to pick 
>the group that they want to represent them.
>
>It is possible to have election methods that support multiple  dimensions, 
>i.e. more than these two. One could e.g. simply have  multiple orthogonal 
>"party" structures and then in the vote counting  process force the 
>representatives to be elected so that  proportionality will be respected in 
>all dimensions.
>
>There could be also additional "fixed dimensions" like automatic  fixed sex 
>or age based proportionality.
>
>Some of the additional dimensions could also be "virtual districts"  in the 
>sense that each voter would be registered in exactly one of  them, and 
>probably also vote only for candidates that belong to one's  own "virtual 
>district". I understood that you would use virtual  districts to replace 
>the current geographical districts (and the  geographical proportionality 
>that they represent).
>
>The simplest (not necessarily optimal) approach to implement multiple  
>dimensions is one where you simply elect representatives starting  from the 
>ones with strongest support (e.g. best candidate of the  largest party in 
>the largest district), skip candidates that can not  be elected any more 
>(e.g. district already full, party already full),  and continue until all 
>seats have been filled. At some point in the  chain all "requirements" of 
>all dimensions are met if they are strong  enough (and if there are 
>suitable candidates left).
>
>(Some dimensions could be one-directional in the sense that one would  aim 
>at guaranteeing  at least a proportional share of the seats but  would not 
>limit them to this number. For example one could allow all  members of some 
>minority to require proportional representation by  marking this in their 
>ballot. Other voters would however not be  required to vote either for or 
>against this minority. Any candidate  (or any party, of any regions etc.) 
>could belong to this group. One  should however not allow these lists to 
>overrule party  proportionality or other "complete dimensions" (to avoid 
>riding under  two flags (party and "minority") and getting also 
>corresponding  double representation).)
>
>Small ad here too. Trees (hierarchical candidate lists) offer  multiple 
>dimensions in a simplified framework, but with priorities  involved too. 
>One can e.g. be a greenish red or a reddish green.
>
>Juho
>
>
>
>On Sep 4, 2008, at 1:01 , Stéphane Rouillon wrote:
>
>>Hello electorama fans,
>>
>>regarding that last comment, I invite those interested in non- 
>>geographical district
>>to consider astrological district. The idea is to obtain equivalent  
>>samples of the electorate
>>in term of any distribution (age, geography, profession, language,  
>>religion,...) like
>>poll survey use. For example, in Quebec with near 4 000 000  electors, we 
>>could
>>obtain around 73 (73 x 5 = 365 days) of less than 55 000 electors  each.
>>Thus electorate results could indicate a better performance from  some 
>>candidates
>>instead of reflecting the district bias produced by its design.
>>For example the first district could be formed with all Quebecors  born 
>>between
>>1st and 5th of january, the 2nd with Quebecors born between 6th and  10th 
>>of january
>>and so on...
>>
>>For more details of an electoral system using such "districts",  search 
>>for SPPA
>>(Scrutin Préférentiel, Proportionel et Acirconscriptif in french).
>>An english version is available on the electoral reform website
>>of the British-Colombia citizen assembly.
>>
>>...
>>>However, even something like "they should be compact" favours some
>>>people.  If you are part of a group that is spread evenly, then  you do
>>>worse if the districts are compact.  The problem is that philosophy
>>>that districts should be geographically based.
>>>----
>>>Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  list 
>>>info
>>
>>
>>----
>>Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  list 
>>info
>
>
>
>___________________________________________________________ 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
>
>----
>Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info