[EM] What's wrong with the party list system?

[Jameson Quinn]

>
>
>
> The nice feature of existing party list methods is that it allows the
> election of a large number of candidates to a large national body of
> legislators without requiring voters to rank individually a huge
> number of candidates.


Yes, this is the main reason for people who favor party list systems. Note
that this same advantage can be given, without giving any centralized power
to party structures, by using Asset or Asset/STV blends.  These can include
ballots of any complexity - from vote-for-one to full ratings ballots - and
many different proportional vote assignment/transfer rules. They can even do
things similar to mixed member systems, in which all votes are local but
vote transfers can be regional/national. And parties can voluntarily
recreate the effects of either open or closed lists within such systems. The
only downside to asset-like PR systems is that they require the candidates
to be somewhat more sophisticated.

Thus, in general, I prefer such systems to party lists. Also, with my house
in Guatemala, I've seen close-up how extremely dysfunctional closed party
list systems can get.

JQ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20110704/5310f00b/attachment-0004.htm>