From: "Renato V Aguila" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:30:01 +0800 Subject: Re: 01/31/02 - Two new design features for STV:
Dear Donald, You ask, "What does the public want?" And then you say that your ideas are what the public want. Or is it what the party leaders want? Remember, STV (except in the Aussie context, which may even not be STV) is all about voting for individuals, thus denying party leaders even the idea of exerting control through party boxes. You assume that fifty per cent of people would be giving political party lists (yes, they are party lists, no matter how you would count them) their first preferences. Well, he may be right. Or he may not be. It might be even more, even with any form of optional preferential voting. That is what the party leaders in NSW may have been counting on when they made their changes to the Legislative Council elections law. As I said, Donald, you can propose your ideas to the Australian government. I'm sure it would delight ALP and Liberal leaders who fear that Hare-Clark might give more voter control over the kind of people that enter the Australian Senate. Or you can propose them to any country that needs to strengthen its political parties, like mine. However, I would never recommend it for private elections, such as those in clubs or university senates, etc. I hope to hear how you will incorporate this into any of the plans you put on your website. Ren Aguila PS. Just one question, though: where did you get the "fifty per cent" number? What empirical study can you give us as a basis of such an assertion? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 02/02/02 - "No, it is not what the party leaders want!" by Donald Davison Dear Ren, You wrote: "Dear Donald, You ask, "What does the public want?" And then you say that your ideas are what the public want." Donald: You wrong me. If I ask a question, I am also free to answer that question. When I write `I say...' I am qualifying the answer as being my opinion and not necessarily anyone elses opinion. Others are free to express an opinion, including you. Ren: "Or is it what the party leaders want? Remember, STV is all about voting for individuals, thus denying party leaders even the idea of exerting control through party boxes." Donald: No, it is not what the party leaders want. In any election, it is safe to estimate that at least fifty percent of the voters are not informed and therefore have no real reason, except party, to vote for any candidate. It is best if we can seperate these voters from the voters who are informed so that it will be the informed voters that will select which candidates are to be elected. The system of partisan STV that I propose will do this. The informed voters, not the party leaders, will have the means to control the final selection of candidates. Those who vote for party will be supporting the party of their choice. Those who vote for individual candidates will be deciding which candidates are to get the seats. The votes in the party box will be supporting the party vs the other parties, but these votes will not be deciding which candidates are to be elected. Ren: "PS. Just one question, though: where did you get the "fifty per cent" number? What empirical study can you give us as a basis of such an assertion?" Donald: Fifty percent is a conservative number. In Deane's letter she said that 95% vote above the line for party. True, no one likes to rank all 76 candidates, but it is not that big an ordeal. In Dean's case, she has a few individual candidates she likes. She should rank these few and then finish the 76 rankings by using the ticket from the party of her choice. If she really wants to vote for candidates she will do this. You may argue that the percent would be less than 95 under other conditions, but I say not by much. The people who want to vote for candidates are voting for candidates. Regards, Donald Davison, http://www.mich.com/~donald +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ | Q U O T A T I O N | | "Democracy is a beautiful thing, | | except that part about letting just any old yokel vote." | | - Age 10 - | +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ APV Approval Voting ATV Alternative Vote aka IRV Instant Runoff Voting FPTP First Past The Post aka Plurality NOTA None of the Above aka RON Re-Open Nominations STV Single Transferable Vote aka Choice Voting aka Full Choice Please be advised that sending email to me allows me to quote from it and/or forward the entire email to others.
