David Shove wrote:
"Say you have 3 wards, each with 4 seats. Then it takes 1/4 20% of the vote to elect. That means smaller parties will be frozen out. Take your choice - tailor districts so some poor areas are guaranteed geo rep OR allow smaller parties to win. Either way someone with less power loses. I prefer to try smaller parties. And, the few the reps per district, the more the DFL will take more seats than their percentage. I do not want to go to the trouble of getting PR only to help the DFL have more seats than it is entitled to - as it has had for decades."
(AN) Are we back to Brauer's intrigued notion of the 4 Wards/3 Reps (4/3) idea, or something close to this?
David Brauer wrote:
"Although it conflicts with my principle of "smaller districts allow cheaper candidacies," I'm intrigued by multi-member districts. You could have six wards, two reps each, plus the mayor (or four wards/three reps). The downside is that one part of the bigger ward could dominate; the upside is you would have more reps who represent you -— without them representing everyone citywide and you getting lost in the shuffle."
(AN) What I would like to know is how exactly Shove's Proportional Representation (PR) Single Transferable Vote (STV) example would look like in Minneapolis. Are we back to one big Ward, or something more geographically sliced? I need a specific example or two to rap my head around this one. Thanks!
Aaron Neumann
Holland Neighborhood, NE Mpls.
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
