Hi,
Since we're talking about membership and voting, let's vote in such a way
that we're making sure that voices are heard. In the DNSO application we
put together in Paris, we favored single transferable voting (STV) - but in
any case some kind of proportional representation is surely indicated.
Here are some good resources about proportional representation, with an
emphasis on STV. I hope this will help generate some good substantive
discussion. If we want fairness, let's think about fairness critically -
what it means, how to achieve it.
Antony
LINKS
http://www.barnsdle.demon.co.uk//vote/minSTV.html - A simple method of
implementing STV
http://www.barnsdle.demon.co.uk/vote/fracSTV.html - Rules for implementing
STV (fractional method)
http://member.aol.com/loringrbt/elect.html - Advocates a mix of STV and
Condorcet rules, but explains each of them very well. Good discussions how
to use different voting systems to achieve the desired effect (e.g., most
popular, most stable, least risky, etc.) There's also a freeware version of
"Political SIM" to test it out...
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~lee/prsa/pr.html "The Case for PR" (Proportional
Representation) - Quick summary of STV rules, why it's better.
Australia has been using STV voting since early this century. There is even
a service that will conduct the voting for you for not much at all, although
they are based in Australia. See
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~lee/prsa/count_help.html. This same group puts out
some software, with source code. See
http://www.cs.mu.OZ.AU/~lee/prsa/count/count_form.html
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/prlib.htm - Proportional
representation library. Some beginning readings, lots more scholarly
articles, case studies.
http://www.gn.apc.org/ers - The Electoral Reform Society from the U.K. This
site is frequently cited, but I can't get the name to resolve. Included
here in the hopes that the problem is temporary.
Finally, a message from Nigel Roberts of Guernsey (.GG), an IATLD member,
sent to me about a week ago when I asked him about STV:
-----Original Message-----
From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 05, 1999 12:13 PM
To: Antony Van Couvering
Subject: STV
Single Transferable Vote
Eur.-Ing. Nigel Roberts ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
The following is a description of the Single Transferable Vote system,
with great thanks to the Electoral Reform Society of Great Britain
from whom most of the material derives
[The ERS provides practical assistance to many non-profit
organisations in conducting elections by STV.]
STV
------
Single Transferable Vote is an electoral system which will:
- Ensure all votes have equal value;
- Give effective representation to all significant points of view
within the electorate;
- Allow electors to vote for their preferred candidates without fear
of wasting their votes;
- Ensure the accountability of individual representatives to their
electorates.
How the System Works:
--------------------------------------
Each parliamentary constituency would elect between 3 and 5
representatives depending on its size.
Voters rank the candidates, putting a '1' for their favourite, a '2'
for the next, and so on.
It's as simple as that!
If the voter's first choice candidate does not need their vote, either
because he or she is elected without it, or because he or she has too
few votes to be elected, then the vote is transferred to the voter's
second choice candidate, and so on.
In this way, most of the votes help to elect a candidate and far fewer
votes are wasted.
Details
----------
An important feature of STV in national parliamentary elections (e.g.
in the Irish Republic) is that voters can choose between candidates
both of their own and of other parties, and can even select candidates
for reasons other than party affiliation. Thus, a voter, wishing for
more women MPs could vote for a woman from their own party and then
all other women candidates, whatever party they stand for.
The system is used: in the Australian Senate, the Republic of Ireland,
Tasmania, Malta and Northern Ireland for local elections and for
elections to the European Parliament (NI will retain STV in 1999)
STV does more than other systems to guarantee that everyone gets their
views represented and that they have a say in what is done by their
elected representatives.
STV is the best option for:
a) Putting the power in the hands of people instead of parties
b) Keeping representatives linked to the people who voted for them.
c) Most voters can identify a representative that they personally
helped to elect and can feel affinity with. Such a personal link
increases accountability and transparency.
c) Making the body of elected representatives reflect the views of the
voters.
Only a party or coalition of parties, who could attract more than 50%
of the electorate could form a government elected under STV.
Any changes would have to be backed by a majority since public opinion
is reflected fairly in elections under STV. This is far more important
than that a government should be formed by only one political party or
viewpoint.
It enables the voters to express opinions effectively.
Voters can choose between candidates within parties, demonstrating
support for different wings or viewpoints.
Voters can also express preferences between the abilities or other
attributes, of individual candidates.
** It is simple for voters to use. **
Voters cannot vote negatively. They have to cast a positive vote and
know that their vote will not be wasted whatever their choice is.
It produces governments that are strong and stable because they are
founded on the majority support of the electorate. STV, to quote Enid
Lakeman, (who was the UK's leading advocate of STV)
"takes the voters as its starting point - not the party- and seeks to
give effect to the wishes of every voter, whatever they may be and
whether they have anything to do with party or not".
