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

[Kathy Dopp]

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Please don't lump IRV and STV. Yes, they use the same underlying mechanisms,
> but the effects are totally different. STV can, in practice, completely
> eliminate the partisan spoiler problem; IRV cannot. And, as I've said above,
> the core STV insight - the part that's shared by other STV systems like
> Schulze-STV - is not the bottom-up elimination, but the transfer and
> assignment of votes.
> JQ

STV reduces to IRV in the last round and shares many of the same flaws
as IRV including, but not limited to - unequal treatment of voters'
votes, hiding the 2nd and later choices of some voters not others,
nonmonotonicity, requires centralized counting or a huge number of
separate totals for each precinct (more than the number of precinct
voters in any case with large numbers of candidates), and thus
eviscerates election transparency and verifiability, and has potential
to create all sorts of anomalous outcomes.  In other words, is one of
the few voting methods that fails more of Arrow's fairness criteria
than plurality method and introduces extreme difficulties in
administering elections and verifying the integrity of outcomes.  Both
IRV and STV pose a serious threat the fairness and integrity of
elections IMO and I oppose these methods strongly.



-- 

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."

Fundamentals of Verifiable Elections
http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174

View some of my research on my SSRN Author page:
http://ssrn.com/author=1451051