Sorry about re-sending this. I forgot to change the title, and this
post has nothing to do with the previous title.
http://rangevoting.org/PropRep.html
"You want to get both best possible quality & accountability and best
possible representation"
This is an interesting point. What about an assembly elected as follows:
The country is split into 3*N districts and the districts are grouped
into groups of 15 districts.
Each district elects 1 representative using approval with a reasonable
one seat system.
The groups then each elect 5 candidates from 15 first round winners
using PR-STV or some other PR system where the voters get to
pick who gets elected.
In theory, both ballots could be cast at the same time. However,
having to rank all candidates for 15 districts might be pushing it
a little. This headache could be lessened by allowing voters to
vote for their favorite candidates and then vote for party. (the
party would only matter if the vote has to transfer past the
candidate listed on the ballot). Another option would be that they
could vote by district for the later options.
Step 1 results in higher quality candidates and step 2 results in
proportionality in representation.
In fact, maybe there could be a "Winner's and a Loser's House" (though
you probably wouldn't want to call them that :) ).
Alternatively, after the PR-STV step, the 2 condorcet winners of the
remaining candidates could be elected to the upper house.
Obviously, whichever house is more powerful would have to elect
candidates first. This gets you a (sorta) PR based lower House and
a single seat based lower House.
One issue is that the resulting house would probably be slightly biased
to the districts that elected its members. OTOH, this creates an
incentive for districts to pick a "good" candidate ... though that might
take things back to the 2 party system (as the best way to get
your candidate elected is to pick one from a reliable party ...
though with PR that just means pick a party that will likely get 1
person elected).
Another way of looking at it is that ballot access is based on the first
stage election.
This could be taken to extreme and completely decoupling the 2
elections. There could be regular "ballot access" elections and
only people who have won at least one ballot access election
are allowed to stand for office. However, the election for office
itself would be PR based. The ballot access election districts
might cover 10% of the country. In the US, they could even
be the States.
post has nothing to do with the previous title.
http://rangevoting.org/PropRep.html
"You want to get both best possible quality & accountability and best
possible representation"
This is an interesting point. What about an assembly elected as follows:
The country is split into 3*N districts and the districts are grouped
into groups of 15 districts.
Each district elects 1 representative using approval with a reasonable
one seat system.
The groups then each elect 5 candidates from 15 first round winners
using PR-STV or some other PR system where the voters get to
pick who gets elected.
In theory, both ballots could be cast at the same time. However,
having to rank all candidates for 15 districts might be pushing it
a little. This headache could be lessened by allowing voters to
vote for their favorite candidates and then vote for party. (the
party would only matter if the vote has to transfer past the
candidate listed on the ballot). Another option would be that they
could vote by district for the later options.
Step 1 results in higher quality candidates and step 2 results in
proportionality in representation.
In fact, maybe there could be a "Winner's and a Loser's House" (though
you probably wouldn't want to call them that :) ).
Alternatively, after the PR-STV step, the 2 condorcet winners of the
remaining candidates could be elected to the upper house.
Obviously, whichever house is more powerful would have to elect
candidates first. This gets you a (sorta) PR based lower House and
a single seat based lower House.
One issue is that the resulting house would probably be slightly biased
to the districts that elected its members. OTOH, this creates an
incentive for districts to pick a "good" candidate ... though that might
take things back to the 2 party system (as the best way to get
your candidate elected is to pick one from a reliable party ...
though with PR that just means pick a party that will likely get 1
person elected).
Another way of looking at it is that ballot access is based on the first
stage election.
This could be taken to extreme and completely decoupling the 2
elections. There could be regular "ballot access" elections and
only people who have won at least one ballot access election
are allowed to stand for office. However, the election for office
itself would be PR based. The ballot access election districts
might cover 10% of the country. In the US, they could even
be the States.
Raphfrk
--------------------
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"
www.wikocracy.com
--------------------
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"
www.wikocracy.com
---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
