Comments on: Electoral Systems, Pros and Cons http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/ Speak Victorian, Think Pagan Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:23:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Jayson http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383272 Jayson Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:04:15 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383272 What about demarchy or sortition? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarchy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition What about demarchy or sortition?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarchy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition

]]> By: kende http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383266 kende Sun, 13 Apr 2008 04:51:33 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383266 I think simplicity and fitness for leadership are much more important than fairness as a selecting process. It becomes a question of why we are holding elections: To select the best leadership through a competitive process that includes checks and balances on that leadership? Or to select the lowest common denominator, where the electorate disagrees about the candidate least but is also least concerned with their skills. It seems to me that systems set up to maximize fairness, rather than maximize the quality of the officials in administering the business of the citizenry, are a surefire way to set up a bidding market to see how can beat whom in a race to the bottom. I think simplicity and fitness for leadership are much more important than fairness as a selecting process. It becomes a question of why we are holding elections: To select the best leadership through a competitive process that includes checks and balances on that leadership? Or to select the lowest common denominator, where the electorate disagrees about the candidate least but is also least concerned with their skills. It seems to me that systems set up to maximize fairness, rather than maximize the quality of the officials in administering the business of the citizenry, are a surefire way to set up a bidding market to see how can beat whom in a race to the bottom.

]]> By: Joe http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383265 Joe Sun, 13 Apr 2008 02:41:29 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383265 I'm a fan of the Single Transferable Vote, the system used in Ireland, just because it produces something approximating a fair result (by my book) in most circumstances. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote That said, it's a completely engineered system, and if people can't get their heads around the Electoral College there's no way they're getting their heads around STV. I’m a fan of the Single Transferable Vote, the system used in Ireland, just because it produces something approximating a fair result (by my book) in most circumstances.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote

That said, it’s a completely engineered system, and if people can’t get their heads around the Electoral College there’s no way they’re getting their heads around STV.

]]> By: von Kaufman-Turkestansky http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383259 von Kaufman-Turkestansky Sat, 12 Apr 2008 20:06:14 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383259 Not sure if the example you give under "propotional representation" will necessarily lead to a tyranny of the minority. Remember, the coalition's leading party represents a minority too - just a bigger minority. In theory, the policies that will be voted for in the legislative assembly will be ones that both the leading party and the "kingmaker" can get behind. But there are situations where "coalition" in the traditional sense does not even have to be formally created. Canada is an interesting example at the moment that kind of belies the examples given in this post. It's a "first-past-the-post" system (ie single candidate district) that is in a minority government situation now. But no coalition. All three opposition parties (the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois) are in opposition. But the ruling Conservatives have been able to exploit a situation where the main "traditional" opposition (the former governing party) is still weak, having chosen an unpopular leader and still feeling the effects of the scandal that hurt it badly in the last general election. It is a weird situation, created by having more than two strong parties and strong regional differences. This editorial provides an analysis: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/03/27/the-post-editorial-board-st-233-phane-dion-has-given-harper-a-minority-with-majority-power.aspx ... "...The current situation in the House of Commons — highlighted by this week’s Canwest News Service analysis of voting patterns by the various parties — must be largely without precedent in Canadian history. For all intents and purposes, the largest opposition party on the floor of the House has ceased to exist. ... ... A lot of pundits have been heard saying during the life of this government that Canadians like the idea of a Conservative ministry with a minority in the House as the best of all possible worlds. What we’ve ended up with, though, is a minority with majority power. In some closely-contested constituencies, at least a few of the voters must be thinking they might as well get the benefit of representation on the government side if there is going to be no brake on Tory executive power anyway." Not sure if the example you give under “propotional representation” will necessarily lead to a tyranny of the minority. Remember, the coalition’s leading party represents a minority too – just a bigger minority. In theory, the policies that will be voted for in the legislative assembly will be ones that both the leading party and the “kingmaker” can get behind. But there are situations where “coalition” in the traditional sense does not even have to be formally created.

Canada is an interesting example at the moment that kind of belies the examples given in this post. It’s a “first-past-the-post” system (ie single candidate district) that is in a minority government situation now. But no coalition. All three opposition parties (the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois) are in opposition. But the ruling Conservatives have been able to exploit a situation where the main “traditional” opposition (the former governing party) is still weak, having chosen an unpopular leader and still feeling the effects of the scandal that hurt it badly in the last general election. It is a weird situation, created by having more than two strong parties and strong regional differences. This editorial provides an analysis:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/03/27/the-post-editorial-board-st-233-phane-dion-has-given-harper-a-minority-with-majority-power.aspx …

“...The current situation in the House of Commons — highlighted by this week’s Canwest News Service analysis of voting patterns by the various parties — must be largely without precedent in Canadian history. For all intents and purposes, the largest opposition party on the floor of the House has ceased to exist. ...
... A lot of pundits have been heard saying during the life of this government that Canadians like the idea of a Conservative ministry with a minority in the House as the best of all possible worlds. What we’ve ended up with, though, is a minority with majority power. In some closely-contested constituencies, at least a few of the voters must be thinking they might as well get the benefit of representation on the government side if there is going to be no brake on Tory executive power anyway.”

]]> By: Alfred Russel Wallace http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383240 Alfred Russel Wallace Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:06:10 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383240 The major concern with democracy is marrying what can be mercurial popular opinion with some stability - necessitating a second house (House of Lords, Senate, etc)or in the short-term, super-delegates. And, of course, a separation of powers... The major concern with democracy is marrying what can be mercurial popular opinion with some stability – necessitating a second house (House of Lords, Senate, etc)or in the short-term, super-delegates. And, of course, a separation of powers…

]]> By: Curzon http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383237 Curzon Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:16:15 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383237 Darin: that's called proportional representation. Darin: that’s called proportional representation.

]]> By: kende http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383234 kende Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:06:53 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383234 While Democracy is the least miserable system we have so far, I think there is still a lot of room for improvement, and there are big differences between the ways of doing it. What are your thoughts about preference based voting systems? And what about range voting? I'm not convinced of them myself, but I'm still open to persuasion. Ultimately every system is only as good as the people within it. While Democracy is the least miserable system we have so far, I think there is still a lot of room for improvement, and there are big differences between the ways of doing it. What are your thoughts about preference based voting systems? And what about range voting? I’m not convinced of them myself, but I’m still open to persuasion. Ultimately every system is only as good as the people within it.

]]> By: Michael http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383231 Michael Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:45:20 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383231 My big problem with proportional representation? Parties don't sit in the big chair, day after day, listening to arguments, doing work and making hard decisions. People do. If I'm just voting for a party, what guarantee do I have that the person the party bosses pick to fill the seat will be even remotely competent and honest? That said, I can see such a system working ok if rearranged along the lines of a board of directors. Each party sends a single representative to a grand council. Each council member gets X number of votes according to the number of votes his/her party got in the election, with some decisions possible with a majority of council members (regardless of votes exercised). Votes are limited to Executive (including Chief Executive) and Judicial appointments, inquiries and impeachments as well as major decisions like budgets and wars. My big problem with proportional representation? Parties don’t sit in the big chair, day after day, listening to arguments, doing work and making hard decisions. People do. If I’m just voting for a party, what guarantee do I have that the person the party bosses pick to fill the seat will be even remotely competent and honest?

That said, I can see such a system working ok if rearranged along the lines of a board of directors. Each party sends a single representative to a grand council. Each council member gets X number of votes according to the number of votes his/her party got in the election, with some decisions possible with a majority of council members (regardless of votes exercised). Votes are limited to Executive (including Chief Executive) and Judicial appointments, inquiries and impeachments as well as major decisions like budgets and wars.

]]> By: Sejo http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383223 Sejo Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:05:58 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383223 We're going to vote, in Italy, on this weekend. We will elect our representatives in the both the Lower and Higher House. Like we Italians need a Parliament and a Government at all. The really funny thing is that the ultimate law on elections proportionally gives more senators to the biggest opposition party than the one who actually wins the elections. Therefore, we will have another short-lived Parliament and Government. From my point of view, the best - or most correct – electoral system is a pure proportional system with no minimum percentage to be part of the distributions of seat and a huge (up to 55% of each House?) quote of seats automatically assigned to the party who gets most popular votes. We’re going to vote, in Italy, on this weekend. We will elect our representatives in the both the Lower and Higher House. Like we Italians need a Parliament and a Government at all.
The really funny thing is that the ultimate law on elections proportionally gives more senators to the biggest opposition party than the one who actually wins the elections. Therefore, we will have another short-lived Parliament and Government.
From my point of view, the best – or most correct – electoral system is a pure proportional system with no minimum percentage to be part of the distributions of seat and a huge (up to 55% of each House?) quote of seats automatically assigned to the party who gets most popular votes.

]]> By: Darin http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-383221 Darin Thu, 10 Apr 2008 13:44:00 +0000 http://cominganarchy.com/2008/04/10/electoral-systems-pros-and-cons/#comment-383221 What if it was just a straight majority vote, with no districts at all? Wouldn't that be the best way to get a direct sample of the public opinion? What if it was just a straight majority vote, with no districts at all? Wouldn’t that be the best way to get a direct sample of the public opinion?

]]>