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

[Raph Frank]

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Jonathan Lundell <jlundell at pobox.com> wrote:
>> - You mentioned earlier that the first vice president should come from a different grouping than the president. If people agree with this, then they should agree that similar principles should apply also to the rest of the council.
>
> As a historical note, the US Constitution originally had a rather convoluted scheme for electing the president and VP (even more convoluted than the present scheme, that is). The fact that it could (and did, in 1796) result in the P & VP being from opposing parties was one of the reasons for the 12th amendment <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution>.

The issue here was that the VP would replace the President if the
President died.  This means that if the President dies/resigns, power
is handed over to the minority.

Tyranny of the majority can be bad, but tyranny by a minority is worse.

I think the current proposal for VP election is reasonable.  However,
it might be worth having the first VP elected as the 2nd place
condorcet winner.

The result would be

P>VP1>VP2=VP3>rest of council

This means that the first VP also represents the political centre and
would be a reasonable replacement for the President.