Peter,

Some good sources of PR advocacy (in English) are FairVote, the Proportional 
Representation Foundation, and the Electoral Reform Society of the UK (though 
most of these focus on single transferable vote, and some folks on this list 
prefer other methods).

FairVote's site is here http://www.fairvote.org/fair-representation 
Proportional Representation Foundation's is http://prfound.org/
and The Electoral Reform Society's is here http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/

Terry Bouricius
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Peter Zbornik 
  To: Kristofer Munsterhjelm ; Election Methods 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 11:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [EM] Why proportional elections - Power arguments needed (Czech 
green party)


  Dear all,

  just a post scriptum to the email below to make things clear:
  I wonder if there is a short and to the point argument for dummies, why 
proportional elections (say elections meeting the droop quota) leave the voters 
happier than winner-takes it all elections.
  This "for dummies" explanation of the advantages of proportional voting could 
be combined with a longer technical explanation, perhaps using social welfare 
functions. for people with time and interest to understand the argument in full.

  I don't mean that the argument above would be the best argument, but it could 
be a really interesting one.

  Best regards
  Peter ZbornĂ­k


  On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Peter Zbornik <[email protected]> wrote:

    Dear Kristoffer, dear readers,

    Kristofer, you wrote below: "A minor opinion within the party might need 
time to grow, and might in the end turn out to be significant, but using a 
winner-takes-it-all method quashes such minority opinions before they get the 
chance."

    Thanks, yes I have used this line of argument a lot (we actually have a 
global charter of the greens, according to which the greens are obliged to put 
the same principles into practice in thei organizations as they work for in 
society).
    The problem is, that this argument does not "stick", it is simply not sexy.

    Would it be possible to measure the "utility" or "happiness" among the 
voters in the party compared to different election methods. I saw you Kristofer 
did some work on this but I didn't understand it, I guess I lack the 
preliminaries.

    I guess the notion of "Bayesian regret" or something similar could be used 
to argue that proportional elections are better than block-voting, but I have 
no idea of how to explain this, as I don't know the subject at all (pareto 
optimal social allocations, or whatever).

    It seems intuitive that economic tools could be used (I know almost no 
economics), since ranked ballot elections simply are explicitly stated 
preference orderings. 

    I guess that voting and elections, could be indeed one of the best 
imaginable real-world examples, where preference orderings of the actors 
actually are known, and thus all of the machinery of economic equilibria and 
social welfare functions could be applied (like the Bernoulli-Nash social 
welfare function).

    I am personally interested in the possiblity of measuring utility, is there 
some (preferably short) literature on social welfare, utility and voting theory 
for proportional elections (I know some undergrad maths and statistics)?

    Best regards
    Peter


    On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm 
<[email protected]> wrote:

      Peter Zbornik wrote:

        Dear all,
         thank you for your help with the election system for the council 
elections of the green party.
        I will try to move on with technical testing of Schulze's methods and 
the specification of the elections to the party lists as soon as time allows.
        Thanks all for the support and all methods supplied.
        I never could imagine that I would get such a response.
        When advocating proportional elections in the party, I have found it 
difficult to explain to other members of the green party why proportional 
elections to our party organs is a good thing.



      As far as I remember, your party, the Czech Green Party, is a minor 
party. Therefore, it might be possible to draw an analogy to the proportional 
methods used by the Czech Republic itself. Without proportional representation, 
the Green Party would have next to no chance of ever getting into parliament. 
However, since your nation does use proportional representation, there is some 
chance.

      The same argument could be used within the party. Since the Green Party 
is a minor party, I reason that the party membership honestly believes the 
presence of that party is a good thing. Thus, they would also know (to some 
extent, at least), that minor groups of opinion - like their own party in 
comparison to the major parties - can be good and can add valuable ideas to 
governance. Then could not the same argument be used for the party itself? A 
minor opinion within the party might need time to grow, and might in the end 
turn out to be significant, but using a winner-takes-it-all method quashes such 
minority opinions before they get the chance.







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  ----
  Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Reply via email to