1. Proportional Representation is obsolete, now that we have technology to easily implement Proxy Direct Democracy. (I discussed Proxy DD in a fairly recent post).
2. Largest Remainder, with the Hare quota, doesn't favor small parties. It's unbiased with respect to party-size. But it's also not very proportional. It has lots of random deviation from proportionality. Sainte-Lague is the proportional PR. Sainte-Lague is known, in Congressional apportionment discussion, as "[Daniel] Webster's method". It has a different implementation-rule definition from that of Sainte-Lague, but it's the same method, giving the same apportionment. Largest Remainder is known, in Congressional apportionment discussion as "[Alexander] Hamilton's method". Both of those methods have been used to apportion the U.S. House of Representatives. Of course both are used for PR too. If you don't believe that Sainte-Lague is the most proportional PR method, then look at my Sainte-Lague PR article at Barnsdale's electoral website. I think that the URL is something like http://www.Barnsdle.demon.co.uk/vote/PR PR is unwinnable in the U.S, where electoral reform, in addition to efforts for Proxy DD, should be about a better single-winner method. Of course, with Proxy DD, all decisions will be single-winner decisions, among all kinds of sets of alternatives. Mike Ossipoff
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
