[EM] (no subject)

[Jonathan Lundell]

On Nov 2, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Juho wrote:

> Ok, these examples are sort of second level behind the hottest  
> political arena. It makes sense not to involve party politics e.g.  
> in decision making in the schools. Are there maybe counties/cities  
> where the primary decision making body would have remained non- 
> partisan?

In California, my sense is that most city elections and some county  
elections are in fact (not just nominally) non-partisan. That's not  
true for larger cities and counties, where the nominally non-partisan  
seats tend to be the farm team for the major parties--it's how you get  
on the ladder to the show.

>
> Juho
>
>
> On Nov 2, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
>
>> On Nov 1, 2009, at 10:49 PM, Juho wrote:
>>
>>>> Firstly, STV-PR can be used in all public elections, including  
>>>> those that are non-partisan.
>>>
>>> Yes. Non-partisan multi-winner elections are however rare in  
>>> politics. They may be more common e.g. when electing only a small  
>>> number of representatives within a small community.
>>
>> Non-partisan multi-seat bodies compose the overwhelming majority of  
>> elected offices in California. All our local boards (county and  
>> city governing board, school boards, fire protection and sanitation  
>> districts) are elected this way, and would be prime candidates for  
>> STV.
>>
>> My sense is that this is fairly common across the US, though in  
>> some states some of these offices are partisan. There's plenty of  
>> scope for non-partisan PR.
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  
> list info