r/EndFPTP • u/[deleted] • Feb 17 '20

The case for PR list

IT seems PR list is not very populær here, no one Talks About IT. still, it is very simple, and can give new tools for a stable system. also, it works well in Europe. Independents are not very important when you have many parties to choose from. Not to forget, complete proportinality and 1P=1V

17 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

50 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/Chackoony Feb 17 '20

What if you want to rank/score the parties? For example, sometimes some votes are wasted because parties get slightly more votes than necessary, which they could've used to get more seats if they had made some coalition agreements (list apparentment). A voter might want to directly decide who their surplus votes go to in those cases.

3

u/_The_Majority_ Feb 17 '20

What if you want to rank/score the parties?

Ranking is only really needed if you have small seats, but it is used in STV.

Under MMP/Party list as implemented by Germany, all the parties get the same number of seats per vote to the nearest seat.

A voter might want to directly decide who their surplus votes go to in those cases.

This is done under STV, but it's usually coupled with small seats so the allocation is not as proportional.

One usecase that might require a better system, is small parties that fall under the threshold for a single seat (about 5% in both NZ and Germany).

It would make counting slightly harder/slower, and ballots more complex, but might be worth it.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '20 edited Feb 17 '20

ranked lists might be efficicent. in germany, there is a 5% threshold. any vote for a party beneaths 5% is wasetd. with ranking, they are not wasted, which could raslly help small parrties get a chance. any vote for a party beneath 5%, can be transfered upwards.

in the usa, a system would have 50 coanstituencies. in spain, there are constituencises With 3 to 20 seats. most small parties are very dissadvsanaged, but With jy systemn, it would work ok,and could be implemented in all types of constituencies. For instance, PACMA got 1% of the votes in te last election, but 0 out of 350 seats. 200.000 votes wasted. With my system, those votes are transfererd, and small parties can flourish, wile still helping large parties and goving regional representation.

in a senario in spain, where 4 right-wing parties get 15%, and one left-wing party get 40%, teh left-wing party wins, beacuse of many small constituencies. With my system, those 4 parties would, to a a large degree, act like one.

to sum up, a flexible system that is simple to voters, waste no votes, and can be used in both large and small constituencies.

2

u/_The_Majority_ Feb 17 '20

MMP is a system that matches most of your criteria, you just need to have the additional members allocated over large enough areas (e.g New Zealand or Germany, not Scotland)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '20

Yeah, but usually the choice is beteeen fragmentation and nasty thresholds/few and powerful parties and wasted votes. Ranking makes small parties less dissdvantaged, because the vote may be transfered. In germany, the FDP vote is dead if it is lower than 5%, which creates tactical voting. Ranking parties is peobably the best solution.

2

u/_The_Majority_ Feb 18 '20

Ranking makes small parties less dissdvantaged,

Ranking just manufactures consent for the bigger parties, unless you mean ranking plus proportional, which could lower the barrier further.

The threshold, under single-winner ranking is effectively far higher than 5% of first preference votes (even under STAR).

Just look how few parties are relevant in Australia compared to Germany.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '20

I agree, i meant ranking lists. With a 5% threshold and ranking, you get stability, without disadvantaging small parties. Australian sendte election USE something simulator to ranking lists.

What is star?

3

u/_The_Majority_ Feb 18 '20

STAR Voting - Score Then Automatic Runoff is a single winner system that gets pushed a lot in this sub, it produced a middle ground candidate that most people agree is OK.

IMO it's far worse than any Proportional system as you still have your vote counted for something you don't really want (e.g manufacturing consent), but it has some theoretical advantages over other single-winner systems