[EM] Voting systems theory and proportional representation vs simple representation. (Abd ul-Rahman Lomax)

[Kathy Dopp]

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Raph Frank <raphfrk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Kathy Dopp <kathy.dopp at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Abd ul, I agree with virtually all you say that I had time to read,
>> but would prefer party list voting over asset voting simply because it
>> forces the #1 elector, as you put it, to state in advance who he will
>> nominate with any excess votes and also in some systems gives the
>> voters a chance to vote for changes in the order of the list.  This
>> gives options to those voters who are well-informed that asset voting
>> does not.
>
> Party list systems only allow one list per party.  This means that the
> number 1 candidate will be the party leader.
>
> I would prefer each candidate being able to submit his own list, there
> is also the tree system.
>

Raph, Yes I like that idea also.

The list system I was thinking of allows voters to vote to alter the
list order, but I think I like your idea better that voters can vote
for whatever candidate and that candidate's list they like, simply one
vote.  A great proportional representation system, although I don't
think there would be room on the ballot for all those lists, so I
suppose they could be published in advance and in the polling
locations.



-- 

Kathy Dopp
http://electionmathematics.org
Town of Colonie, NY 12304
"One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the
discussion with true facts."

Realities Mar Instant Runoff Voting
http://electionmathematics.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf

Voters Have Reason to Worry
http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf

Checking election outcome accuracy
http://electionmathematics.org/em-audits/US/PEAuditSamplingMethods.pdf