>Proportional Representation (PR) is not an election method in itself, it is >a category of methods that give better proportionality than >Plurality-at-Large. > >What you are talking about above is called `Closed Party List'.
Thanks for the clarification. >You also wrote: "In order for a party to be an option for the ballot, it >must provide a list of candidates equal to the number of seats available." > >Donald: You are being too harsh. Parties should be free to field as many >candidates as they care to put on the ballot. No party would expect to >elect all the seats. True enough. It also occurs to me that a party could want to list *more* candidates than the number of seats available, if they were worried about voters burying candidates from their list that they don't like. >Donald: Yes, it has been proposed before to allow people to vote for >candidates and/or parties in any mix. Although I didn't see any specific mention of this in the following list, I assume that this would be one of the "design features" you mention for STV. I hope it is not one of the ones you consider "undemocratic, unproportional, even corrupt." Is there a place I can look at some of these options? The CVD seems more interested in single-winner elections and never even discusses fractional STV on their website, which is ironic since single-winner elections are by far the worst time to use STV. > Open-Party-List is a party list created by the voters - constructed >from the candidates of the party that are running in the election - in >order of high votes first as produced by the voters in the election. Having >the list decided by the voters makes the party list more democratic than if >the list is made up by the party. I'm not sure I followed this description so let me make sure.Say there are 5 seats and 100 voters. There are three candidates from the Republicrat party, A, B, and C. 23 people vote for B, 12 people vote for A, and 5 people vote for C. Since the party as a whole received 40 votes, they get two seats. Since A and B were the two highest vote-getters within the party, they are elected to those two seats. Is that correct? Thanks for the response, it was a good read. -Adam
