tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6615716556540686703.post5524517101603467811..comments2023-09-01T00:35:22.182-04:00Comments on Wilf Day's Blog: The Law Commission of Canada ReportWilf Dayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05546880754492040363noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6615716556540686703.post-53040740245987807512010-02-07T04:04:23.363-05:002010-02-07T04:04:23.363-05:00Raymond, you're right about Baden-Wurttemberg&...Raymond, you're right about Baden-Wurttemberg's best-runner-up model: it elects no true regional MLAs, just local MLAs with "direct" mandates and other local MLAs with "secondary mandates." A third party with a lower than average support base in a riding will hardly ever get their candidate elected, no matter how strong.<br /><br />Your model would create regional MPs with mandates from both the region and the riding. Very German, since that is how they will inevitably work in any event.<br /><br />But when you say "Parties would still nominate their star candidates in their best ridings" you are thinking of metropolitan areas. Yet 55% or so of Canada's MPs are elected from single-MP communities. Those candidates run, of necessity, in the riding they live in. If Ms. X gets more regional votes than Mr. Y, but Mr. Y runs in a local riding with a stronger party support base than Ms. X's riding and wins the seat, a lot of voters will feel the system has cheated both Ms. X and the voters across the region who preferred her for regional MP.Wilf Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05546880754492040363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6615716556540686703.post-4047259852625358842010-02-07T00:44:21.884-05:002010-02-07T00:44:21.884-05:00Thanks for the compliment & the analysis, Wilf...Thanks for the compliment & the analysis, Wilf.<br /><br />Yes, your points makes sense. But the effects of strong party support in a particular riding influencing "top-up" candidate elections would be less extreme than it is in the 1-vote MMP system of Baden Wurttemberg. The hybrid system is not necessarily designed to be perfectly fair to candidates, just reasonably fair. <br /><br />Parties would still nominate their star candidates in their best ridings as they often do now. I don't know if I would call this a flaw ... just an opportunity for parties to organize their regional slates of candidates to their best advantage.<br /><br />Voters would still have significant control in influencing the results.Raymondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11870700364959398032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6615716556540686703.post-45759007141960517322010-02-06T22:51:44.304-05:002010-02-06T22:51:44.304-05:00Raymond: you think like a German. (That's a co...Raymond: you think like a German. (That's a compliment.) However, your model has one flaw: the winning regional candidate would tend to be the one who ran in a local riding where his or her party was strong, because the riding vote and regional vote are added together. So a candidate who had wider appeal across the region could lose to someone who ran in a strong riding for that party (yet not strong enough to win the local seat.) This would be most likely to happen with a third-party candidate.Wilf Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05546880754492040363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6615716556540686703.post-66531981231780791622010-02-06T22:22:08.576-05:002010-02-06T22:22:08.576-05:00Hi Wilf,
I thought I would leave an idea for an e...Hi Wilf,<br /><br />I thought I would leave an idea for an electoral system design on the blog of an expert dedicated to studying electoral models, for discussion purposes:<br /><br />A "HYBRID" MMP MODEL<br /><br />The following MMP proposal is a "hybrid" between the Bavarian open-list MMP system, and the best runner up MMP system of Baden Wurttemberg. Both of these German electoral sytems count votes cast for the individual candidates to determine the resulting proportionality.<br />The features of the proposal are:<br />1. Two votes that count doubly. (ie. there is a vote for a local riding representative & a vote for a regional representative.) The unique element is that both votes would count towards determining proportionality.<br />2. The riding vote elects a local representative.<br />3. Regional representatives would be elected by adding the riding vote and the regional vote totals together. Regional candidates would fill the "top-up" or compensatory seats, only if not already elected in their home riding.<br />4. The regional list would be composed of candidates from "other" ridings of the region. (A regional list would be unique to each riding, since candidates of the "home riding" would be excluded from the regional ballot.) The purpose of excluding the local candidates of each home riding from the regional ballot is to ensure that the most populated (urban) ridings do not automatically dominate the regional elections. (The vote for any specific candidate would count just once.)<br />5. Regional candidates would have dual loyalties: to their local riding and to their region. "Dual candidacy" would be required in this type of a system.<br />6. The 2 votes could be "split": ie. voters could choose to cast the two votes (riding & regional) for candidates of two different parties. Proportionality would be calculated (or split) accordingly.<br />7. The final election results could be used to fill future vacancies, by providing democratically ordered lists in each region.<br />8. A party could choose to offer all, some, or just a couple of its riding candidates on the regional ballot, depending on its priorities.<br />9. Independent candidates could potentially run on the regional lists (but they would also be in competition with the political parties.)<br />Advantages of this type of design over other MMP designs:<br />1. Voting directly for candidates ensures personal & geographic accountability similar to the examples of Bavaria & Baden Wurttemberg, Germany.<br />2. There would be no voter confusion over whether the 1st vote (riding) or the 2nd vote (regional) counts towards proportionality. This is because both votes would count.<br />3. The 2 ballots would be marked with a simple X.<br />4. Administration & vote counting would be easy.Raymondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11870700364959398032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6615716556540686703.post-78042505303311253192010-01-31T13:13:38.528-05:002010-01-31T13:13:38.528-05:00The recommended system sounds much better than wha...The recommended system sounds much better than what we have now. We'll never have a perfect system, but that's no reason to vote against a specific proposal. Voting against a specific version of proportional representation means, in effect, voting for our current system, which is producing absurd and dangerous results.<br /><br />One detail that always bugs me in these discussions: where in heck did the phrase "first past the post" get started? It always strikes me as a very muddled metaphor that only confuses the discussion. Our current system, for all its flaws, has very little in common with a horse race.northbranchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15337839148725630046noreply@blogger.com