2008/7/17 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Juho wrote: > >> I can see three different local/personal representation concepts here. >> (just to clarify my thoughts, and maybe help some others too) > > I think a better way of breaking down those options would be based on the > how the seats are allocated. > The whole regional/national/district issue is separate. Ofc, for single > seaters, it has to be district based. > > The main issue is the party list vs PR-STV question. The problem is that a > party list system breaks > the link between the candidate and the elected member. Party members must > remain loyal to the > party as the party has all the power.
It is not always true. Open list PR keeps the relation between the candidate and the voter. > >> (under national PR-STV) >> - the representatives do not know which voters voted for them (the voters >> can thus >> contact any representative (that is the name as none:-)) as "their own") > > I don't entirely agree. I think the most likely outcome of implementing > national level PR-STV > would be that each candidate would set up his home base in a certain area. > Most of his > votes would come from people who live near him. If you live far away, you > are much less > likely to be one of his supporters. This is especially true if the ballot > access rules apply and > you are outside the area that he appeared on the ballot. > > However, even if you didn't vote for him. He will still likely try to help > you. Most people > with a problem would become a consistant voter for the person who solved it > for them. Even if > it is only 50%, if he helps 100 people, he gets another 50 secure first > preferences. > > Every vote counts so he doesn't care if you are on the other side of the > country. However, > if you are on the other side of the country, then it may be harder for him > to help as he > doesn't know as much about the local area (or who to contact about your > issue) and also > it might be harder for you to vote for him. > > Also, parties will likely split the country up into 'territory' for each of > their candidates. So, > you would be referred to one of the local members of that party. > > Each TD in Ireland builds up a 'personal vote' throughout his career. This > can be pretty > significant. Some popular candidates can achieve around 2 quotas of votes > due to being > personally popular. > >> Note that the needs of close relationship between a representative and >> his/her voters >> regional proportionality and ability to vote without being bound by the >> party structure >> or by the districts are all quite separate targets. > > I think that PR-STV achieves 2 of them pretty well. The national level > proportionality is > not currently possible due to logistics and also due to larger parties not > wanting to > increase the average number of seats per district. > >> Note that there is a strong correlation between candidates that some voter >> votes and the ideology >> that they represent. It is thus typical that a vote to a candidate is also >> a vote to the ideology/party >> that he/she represents. The total freedom of STV-PR to vote any candidates >> of any party may thus >> quite often be just a nice option but not very needed (typically just low >> level of noise in the results). >> Elected candidates probably work for their party anyway, so one can not >> get rid of these bindings >> even if the voters would be allowed to bypass them in their ballot. > > Under PR-STV, candidates have a high degree of loyalty to their supporters. > In Ireland, TDs spend > alot of time at their local 'clinics' where locals can go talk to them. > There is also a joke that they spend > alot of time at funerals too. > >> The difference between these two approaches is again "more freedom" vs. >> "clear groupings" >> (that keep the ballots simple, help the voters to understand the bindings >> of all of the candidates, >> and after the election bind the representatives to their announced >> policy). > > Right, there can come a point where voter overload is a problem. However, I > think listing > local candidates with the option for write ins should keep the burden low > enough. > > Raphfrk > -------------------- > Interesting site > "what if anyone could modify the laws" > > www.wikocracy.com > > > ________________________________ > The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser. Get the TMZ Toolbar > Now! > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info > > -- ________________________________ Diego Renato dos Santos Mestrando em Ciência da Computação ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info