Just a note that Asset Voting, used multiwinner, effectively creates voter-discretion districts. Want a local district? Vote for a local candidate. If enough others do so, you'll have a local winner. If not, your vote won't be wasted, since your local candidate, noting the vote distribution he or she received, may well simply amalgamate your vote with the closest possible winner that is considered compatible.
What Asset would allow is for voters widely scattered across a state, for example, to still have an elected representative of choice, as long as the quota of them exists. It is their choice if they want to trade proximity for political compatibility. Generally, Asset Voting will not waste their vote if they fail to reach the quota. I assume, though, that voters would generally prefer to have their State Representative have an office close to them, so reps would still have effective districts. They would know their constituency from the precinct votes that led, directly or indirectly, to their election, and this would be traceable (especially if a tranferring candidate specified the source of the votes being transferred, which would not be a part of the election method itself but which certainly could be mentioned by candidates assigning votes.) ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info