In Canada early debates reformers did fight for "representation by population," which was that each province would have the seats it deserved based on its population.
For fairness sake, it was decided that a province with more people would have more seats. a province with fewer would have fewer.
This fairness did not go so far as to say that each political party should be represented according to the votes it receives - more, more and less, less.
Voters were divided into many different separate contests with only the leading candidate in each district being elected.
Back in the 1800s, could PR-STV have been used or MMP? In Britain or Canada or U.S.?
Sure no reason why not. It's not that complicated. It was used in a Danish election, and in an early city election in Adelaide organized by David Spence, father of Catherine Helen Spence, later one of Australia's leading PR campaigners - although never having the vote herself!
But it wasn't. Perhaps it is like why there was never a Dungeons and Dragons rule-playing game back then. they had dice they had rules, they had games but no RPGs. Innovations like that come out of the minds of just a handful of individual each generation. Some of course have good ideas and some have bad ideas.
And then once Spence and Hare and Andrae in Denmark had these ideas, they had to get the government of the day to see the goodness of PR and to get it adopted.
Hare in his lifetime never came close to seeing it used in a political election, although Earl Grey (later Canadian Governor General) did use it in a miner's union election proving that it worked.
Andrae was successful in this - seeing STV used in Danish elections for many years.
Spence saw its its first use on a permanent basis in a Tasmanian state election in her last year of life.
With a disproportional system in use, rep by pop actually can be a weapon against a lesser party.
Say a province increases its population by a third. It gets a third more seats. With FPTP, it is very possible for the same party as before to get a third more seats and the increase in population merely gave more seats to the largest party with the lesser party still under-represented.
As is said, terms can be used in many ways.
Rep. by pop is a form of proportional representation - each province is represented proportionally.
(instead of equally as in the U.S. Senate)
As far as fairness goes (judging by equality of the vote), it is more fair - but just barely - than rep. by area - where each province has number of seats based on geographical size.
The PR we mean when we say PR is representation by vote or Rep. by Voter -- on a party or candidate basis.
Maybe that could be a PR slogan - representation by vote, or representation by party vote.
The wording on placard could be like this:
"Districts or no districts,
we want to elect whom we want to elect."
"PR YES. Voter Misrepresentation - NO" "Let our votes elect representatives."
[a plea for effective voting and for multiple-member districts]
"Districts do a lousy job when they elect a representative
Let voters elect many representatives"
"A district can elect a single member
or a district can elect fairly
-- but it can't do both."
A single member can try to represent all the people in a district.
Many members can represent almost all the people in a district.
Which do you want?
A single member cannot represent all the people in a district. Many members can represent almost all the people in a district. Which do you want? Your vote can elect a single MLA in a district - often more than half don't. Your vote can elect one of many members in your district - 80 percent do. FPTP - often more than 60 percent of votes do not elect the single member elected in a district. STV - often 80 percent of votes do elect the members elected in a district. FPTP - only 17 percent of votes can elect the single member elected in a district. STV - 80 percent of votes do elect the members elected in a district. Your vote can elect a single MLA in a district - often more than half of them don't. In FPTP, that is it. In MMP, your vote may also be used to elect a list member. Do you want one chance or two? What slogans or catchphrases can you think up?
================================================
Comments