Hello Juho,
using age, gender or other virtual dimension to build virtual districts
replaces geographic antagonism by generation antagonism.
The idea is to get equivalent sample that are not opposed by intrinsec
construction.
Thus we may find neutral decision takers that will minimize the overall
bad impacts of a decision, thus maximize to the best of their knowledge
the decisions for all the electorate. If you split representative into
groups who have divergent opinions, the result will not optimize common
interest, it will only illustrate the "rapport de force"
(maybe translated as power struggle) between the representatives. Age
representatives would hardly stay neutral while deciding retirement fees and
pensions for example.
The Irish senate based on profession seems one step toward getting neutral
decision takers
for deciding the localization of projects for example.
I prefer equivalent samples of the entire electorate (phone numbers or hash
tables using names could work too, but it has some slight discrepancies and
problems...)
From: Juho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Election Methods Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [EM] No geographical districts
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 00:13:34 +0300
Geographical proportionality is one specific dimension. Most other
dimensions could be called political dimensions. Also groupings that do
not live in any specific compact area could be called political groupings.
In principle they could form a party and that way get a proportional
number of representatives. (This is also in line with the geographical
proportionality related target of guaranteeing representation from all
_geographic_ areas.)
Many political systems have chosen geographical districts to be fixed in
the sense that people automatically "vote" for the district where they
live in. In the political dimension people are typically allowed to pick
the group that they want to represent them.
It is possible to have election methods that support multiple dimensions,
i.e. more than these two. One could e.g. simply have multiple orthogonal
"party" structures and then in the vote counting process force the
representatives to be elected so that proportionality will be respected in
all dimensions.
There could be also additional "fixed dimensions" like automatic fixed sex
or age based proportionality.
Some of the additional dimensions could also be "virtual districts" in the
sense that each voter would be registered in exactly one of them, and
probably also vote only for candidates that belong to one's own "virtual
district". I understood that you would use virtual districts to replace
the current geographical districts (and the geographical proportionality
that they represent).
The simplest (not necessarily optimal) approach to implement multiple
dimensions is one where you simply elect representatives starting from the
ones with strongest support (e.g. best candidate of the largest party in
the largest district), skip candidates that can not be elected any more
(e.g. district already full, party already full), and continue until all
seats have been filled. At some point in the chain all "requirements" of
all dimensions are met if they are strong enough (and if there are
suitable candidates left).
(Some dimensions could be one-directional in the sense that one would aim
at guaranteeing at least a proportional share of the seats but would not
limit them to this number. For example one could allow all members of some
minority to require proportional representation by marking this in their
ballot. Other voters would however not be required to vote either for or
against this minority. Any candidate (or any party, of any regions etc.)
could belong to this group. One should however not allow these lists to
overrule party proportionality or other "complete dimensions" (to avoid
riding under two flags (party and "minority") and getting also
corresponding double representation).)
Small ad here too. Trees (hierarchical candidate lists) offer multiple
dimensions in a simplified framework, but with priorities involved too.
One can e.g. be a greenish red or a reddish green.
Juho
On Sep 4, 2008, at 1:01 , Stéphane Rouillon wrote:
Hello electorama fans,
regarding that last comment, I invite those interested in non-
geographical district
to consider astrological district. The idea is to obtain equivalent
samples of the electorate
in term of any distribution (age, geography, profession, language,
religion,...) like
poll survey use. For example, in Quebec with near 4 000 000 electors, we
could
obtain around 73 (73 x 5 = 365 days) of less than 55 000 electors each.
Thus electorate results could indicate a better performance from some
candidates
instead of reflecting the district bias produced by its design.
For example the first district could be formed with all Quebecors born
between
1st and 5th of january, the 2nd with Quebecors born between 6th and 10th
of january
and so on...
For more details of an electoral system using such "districts", search
for SPPA
(Scrutin Préférentiel, Proportionel et Acirconscriptif in french).
An english version is available on the electoral reform website
of the British-Colombia citizen assembly.
...
However, even something like "they should be compact" favours some
people. If you are part of a group that is spread evenly, then you do
worse if the districts are compact. The problem is that philosophy
that districts should be geographically based.
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list
info
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list
info
___________________________________________________________ Try the all-new
Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" The Wall Street
Journal http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
