[EM] Why proportional elections - Power arguments needed (Czech green party)

[Terry Bouricius]

Peter,

Some good sources of PR advocacy (in English) are FairVote, the Proportional Representation Foundation, and the Electoral Reform Society of the UK (though most of these focus on single transferable vote, and some folks on this list prefer other methods).

FairVote's site is here http://www.fairvote.org/fair-representation 
Proportional Representation Foundation's is http://prfound.org/
and The Electoral Reform Society's is here http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/

Terry Bouricius
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Peter Zbornik 
  To: Kristofer Munsterhjelm ; Election Methods 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 11:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [EM] Why proportional elections - Power arguments needed (Czech green party)


  Dear all,

  just a post scriptum to the email below to make things clear:
  I wonder if there is a short and to the point argument for dummies, why proportional elections (say elections meeting the droop quota) leave the voters happier than winner-takes it all elections.
  This "for dummies" explanation of the advantages of proportional voting could be combined with a longer technical explanation, perhaps using social welfare functions. for people with time and interest to understand the argument in full.

  I don't mean that the argument above would be the best argument, but it could be a really interesting one.

  Best regards
  Peter Zborník


  On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Peter Zbornik <pzbornik at gmail.com> wrote:

    Dear Kristoffer, dear readers,

    Kristofer, you wrote below: "A minor opinion within the party might need time to grow, and might in the end turn out to be significant, but using a winner-takes-it-all method quashes such minority opinions before they get the chance."

    Thanks, yes I have used this line of argument a lot (we actually have a global charter of the greens, according to which the greens are obliged to put the same principles into practice in thei organizations as they work for in society).
    The problem is, that this argument does not "stick", it is simply not sexy.

    Would it be possible to measure the "utility" or "happiness" among the voters in the party compared to different election methods. I saw you Kristofer did some work on this but I didn't understand it, I guess I lack the preliminaries.

    I guess the notion of "Bayesian regret" or something similar could be used to argue that proportional elections are better than block-voting, but I have no idea of how to explain this, as I don't know the subject at all (pareto optimal social allocations, or whatever).

    It seems intuitive that economic tools could be used (I know almost no economics), since ranked ballot elections simply are explicitly stated preference orderings. 

    I guess that voting and elections, could be indeed one of the best imaginable real-world examples, where preference orderings of the actors actually are known, and thus all of the machinery of economic equilibria and social welfare functions could be applied (like the Bernoulli-Nash social welfare function).

    I am personally interested in the possiblity of measuring utility, is there some (preferably short) literature on social welfare, utility and voting theory for proportional elections (I know some undergrad maths and statistics)?

    Best regards
    Peter


    On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km-elmet at broadpark.no> wrote:

      Peter Zbornik wrote:

        Dear all,
         thank you for your help with the election system for the council elections of the green party.
        I will try to move on with technical testing of Schulze's methods and the specification of the elections to the party lists as soon as time allows.
        Thanks all for the support and all methods supplied.
        I never could imagine that I would get such a response.
        When advocating proportional elections in the party, I have found it difficult to explain to other members of the green party why proportional elections to our party organs is a good thing.



      As far as I remember, your party, the Czech Green Party, is a minor party. Therefore, it might be possible to draw an analogy to the proportional methods used by the Czech Republic itself. Without proportional representation, the Green Party would have next to no chance of ever getting into parliament. However, since your nation does use proportional representation, there is some chance.

      The same argument could be used within the party. Since the Green Party is a minor party, I reason that the party membership honestly believes the presence of that party is a good thing. Thus, they would also know (to some extent, at least), that minor groups of opinion - like their own party in comparison to the major parties - can be good and can add valuable ideas to governance. Then could not the same argument be used for the party itself? A minor opinion within the party might need time to grow, and might in the end turn out to be significant, but using a winner-takes-it-all method quashes such minority opinions before they get the chance.







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  ----
  Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20100519/3a8e2a8b/attachment-0004.htm>