[EM] PR solutions

[Jameson Quinn]

2012/6/8 Ken B <kbearman at isd.net>

> On 6/8/2012 4:33 AM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
>
>> All PR systems have complicated rules. But PAL representation <
>> http://wiki.electorama.com/**wiki/PAL_representation<http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/PAL_representation>>
>> is actually very simple for the voter; they need only cast a single vote,
>> on a ballot which explicitly lists only a manageable dozen or so candidates
>> (though it allows write-ins for a broader number).
>>
> = = = = =
> [Ken B.]  Are you conflating the voting rules with the vote counting
> rules?  Voting in PR systems is simple for voters, whether it's "rank as
> many candidates as you want" (for STV) or "vote for the party you prefer"
> (List PR), for example.  It's the post-voting counting and "winner" rules
> that are more or less complicated.
>

"Rank as many candidates as you want" from a list of many dozens isn't
actually that simple. "Vote for one" from an explicit list you could count
on your fingers, plus an implicit list (available in an explicit annex if
you desire) of dozens of valid write-ins, is clearly simpler.

>
> What's also more or less complicated for voters is understanding how to
> make their choice(s).  If I read the description of PAL correctly, a voter
> has to tease out each candidate's ranked party preferences and compare
> them.


Most lazy voters would treat this as: "choose a party, then vote for the
local candidate from that party". More-engaged voters would treat it as
"find the one candidate whom you trust the most" (either as an officeholder
or as your delegate in choosing which other members of their own party are
preferable and a preference order over the other parties). I honestly can't
imagine how the task could be any simpler for either group, even if you
allow for magic telepathic voting systems. (In particular, neither group
would find it simpler if you forced them to approach it as the other group
does. Engaged voters can't ignore intraparty distinctions, lazy voters
can't see them.)


>  In turn, that seems to require studying and comparing multiple parties'
> platforms (which voters would do in a List PR system, too).  I'm not
> evaluating PAL, just saying that what voters have to do ahead of the
> election isn't necessarily a simple task.
>

Depends what you compare it to. It's simpler than raising a kid, not as
simple as spelling "kid". I think the fairest comparison is to how simple
voting could possibly be, and as I said, I think by that metric it gets a
perfect score. Of course, I'm biased; but I'd love to hear counterarguments.

Jameson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120608/ed2052c7/attachment-0004.htm>