[EM] VoteFair ranking as a PR method

Thu Nov 19 18:46:57 PST 2009

Please include VoteFair ranking in your/Warren's list of PR methods.

(See thread "What does "proportional representation" MEAN? And list of
known PR methods (know any more?)", or message copied below.)

VoteFair ranking is described in my book titled "Ending The Hidden
Unfairness In U.S. Elections".  Portions of the book can be viewed on
Google books, and there is a (large, 19MB) downloadable PDF file of key
chapters, with the link being on this page:

        http://www.votefair.org/province.html

The most significant PR-related part of VoteFair ranking is VoteFair
representation ranking.  (It is described in chapter 15 of my book.)  It
fills a second equivalent seat -- such as in a legislature or board of
directors -- with a candidate who best represents the people who are not
well-represented by the winner of the first seat.  It eliminates
strategic voting techniques such as burying a key competitor and/or
highly ranking an unpopular candidate.

Also there is a component of VoteFair ranking called VoteFair
partial-proportional ranking.  It does the more familiar task of filling
extra seats based on party preferences.  However, it does so in a way
that also involves VoteFair party ranking (and VoteFair popularity
ranking to fill the first equivalent seat).  (This method is described
in Chapter 20.)

The result of using all the components of VoteFair ranking is a
legislature that best represents all the voters, including large
minorities.

There is yet another level of PR beyond filling legislative seats in a
representative way.  For this level I've developed an algorithm at
www.NegotiationTool.com .  As an example of what it does, it allows a
parliament to choose cabinet members who are from multiple political
parties, based on each parliament member ranking all the nominations.
It does so without relying on any limits/quotas/etc. being imposed.  As
an example of why it's needed, consider the Iraqi Parliament where the
Shiite majority outvotes the Sunnis and Kurds (and currently only elects
non-Shiite cabinet members because of limits/requirements established
from the outside).  Without this legislative level of fair voting, 51
percent of a population can tell the other 49 percent what they can and
cannot do.

In my opinion, a big mistake made by many PR methods is that they make
unfair compromises such as using closed party lists, using open party
lists, using quotas, and/or using other unfair voting practices.  Simply
yielding party-category numbers that match the general population's
party category numbers does not yield truly representative results if
the method sacrifices fairness in terms of which candidates win the
seats.

VoteFair ranking keeps the voting simple (rank all the district's
candidates in a single race, and also rank the parties), and protects
against gerrymandering and strategic voting simply by being
well-designed.

I hope to have time to write further explanations of VoteFair ranking in
this forum.  In the meantime, feel free to ask questions.

Richard Fobes
VoteFair.org

                Kristofer Munsterhjelm asked me what "proportional
        representation" (PR) means.

                At this time it is probably unwise to make a too-precise
        definition
                since every PR voting method seems to obey a different
        proportionality
                theorem.  I say you should just assess each theorem on a
        case by case
                basis to see if you like it.

                But a somewhat imprecise definition is:
                I would say that any voting method which elects W winers
        from N
                candidates (arbitrary 0<W<N) with the property that
                  "under an assumption of 'standard racist' voter
        behavior, it always
                elects the same
                  proportions of different-'color' candidates as the
        voters (provided
                enough candidates of
                  each color run) up to some reasonable error bound"  is
        PR.
                However
                   * what is the 'standard racist' voter behavior?
                   * what are the 'error bounds'? (Once they get poor
        enough, they
                 would no longer be acceptable, but I propose no precise
        threshhold)

                These differ from theorem to theorem.  And for Asset
        Voting "standard
                racism" assumptions also are needed about the
        candidate-behavior.

                HERE'S MY LIST OF KNOWN PR VOTING METHODS:
                Webster, and certainly all "divisor methods" for
        party-list (it is one)
                already are known to obey such criteria.   (The very
        definition of
                "divisor method"
                is a PR theorem.) This should include my new notion of
                "generalized divisor methods" where both multiplicative
        and/or
                additive parameters
                are involved. Hamilton-Vinton is one. See
                  http://rangevoting.org/Apportion.html
                  http://www.RangeVoting.org/NewAppo.html
                  http://www.RangeVoting.org/BishopSim.html
                  M.L. Balinski & H. Peyton Young: Fair Representation:
        Meeting the
                Ideal of One
                  Person, One Vote (2nd edition), Brookings Institution
        Press 2001

                Asset voting also obeys a PR theorem.
                   http://rangevoting.org/Asset.html
                  paper #77 at
        http://www.math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html

                RRV also (RRV is kind of based on "stealing" the
                divisor-method idea, inside).
                  paper #78 at
        http://www.math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html
                  http://rangevoting.org/RRV.html

                  Hare/Droop STV also.
                Nicolaus Tideman: The Single transferable Vote,
                J. Economic Perspectives 9,1 (1995) 27-38.

                 And LPV(kappa) ("logarithmic penalty voting") also.
                  Invented by F.Simmons.  Described in paper #91 at
                http://www.math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html

                   Also certain PR methods which are "precinct
        countable"
                 invented by Forest Simmons, see puzzle#15 at
                 http://rangevoting.org/PuzzlePage.html .

                Finally, there was also a simple one invented by a
        student at University of
                Michigan named Tim Hull. See

        http://lists.electorama.com/htdig.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com/2007-April/020194.html

        http://lists.electorama.com/htdig.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com/2007-April/020195.html

                That's my list.  Is anybody aware of any other PR
        methods?

                -- 
                Warren D. Smith
                http://RangeVoting.org  <-- add your endorsement (by
        clicking
                "endorse" as 1st step)
                and
                math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html