[EM] 3 seat Largest Remainder Hare avoids the pit-falls of most ordered party-list elections.

[David L Wetzell]

I blogged about this at my blog a while back in response to the args given
by the Electoral Reform Society of the UK against ordered party list forms
of PR.
http://anewkindofparty.blogspot.com/2011/05/electoral-reform-society-united-kingdom.html

I think a better way to do a mixed method parliamentary election than what
is done in Germany is to have a large number of 4 seat super-districts,
where 3 seats would be elected with a 3 seat LR Hare and the 4th seat would
be elected by some [deliberately unspecified] single-winner election rule
besides FPTP.

It keeps most of the strengths of ordered party list elections and helps
third parties to win some seats and more influence if and only if they are
able to persuade the center that their cause is just.  As such, one could
help a nazi party get elected but they wouldn't gain any ground on their
distinctive issues.

It would counter the criticism that LR Hare does not guarantee a majority
rule or is biased in favor of smaller parties.  The use of a single-winner
election rule would tend to help bigger parties win more seats so that it's
easier to have a clear-cut leadership who is accountable for the actions of
the ruling government.

It wouldn't be proportional, but there be at least one competitive seat per
district, since the case when the 3 seats would be non-competitive with LR
Hare would lead to a very competitive single-winner seat.

And in my view, to guarantee the existence of a balance of non-competitive
and competitive seats is very important for getting people interested,
without making the election get too cut-throat competitive.

It retains the legislator-constituent relationship to a greater degree.
 This
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111117/c76c8b14/attachment-0003.htm>