On Jul 8, 2008, at 15:24 , Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Even though I think multiwinner methods should be party-neutral, I
can see the appeal of MMP: parties are guaranteed to get their
share of the vote, even if the constituency vote is disproportional.
....
use a proportional multiwinner method (like STV) for larger
constituencies, and then award list seats (of a much smaller share
than half the parliament) to patch up whatever disproportionality
still exists - even if the multiwinner method is perfect, rounding
errors regarding district size would introduce some
disproportionality.
I assume you want to have some level of regional representation. =>
At least large districts with multiple seats.
You said you want the method to be party-neutral. => Maybe STV will
do (I assume all party-like list (or tree) based methods would not be
ok).
If you use large districts and STV in each of them (separate
candidates for each district) that should give you already quite
accurate political proportionality (only some rounding errors left).
If the size of the districts is small that would cut out some small
parties (or not give them fully proportional number of seats). (Some
tricks could be used to fix also the remaining rounding errors if
needed.)
My point is that if you are happy with large districts the "MMP
part" (and separation of two different kind of representatives) is
not necessarily needed.
Juho
___________________________________________________________
Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" The Wall Street Journal
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
