RE: 1 new message in 1 topic - digest
Norman Ruff
choice voting in single member districts isn't at all proportional i.e. not
STV but in fact the Australian AV alternative vote (as BC had in 1952-53).
Norman Ruff
>===== Original Message From victoriastv group <nor...@googlegroups.com>
=====
>Victoria STV Yes
>http://groups.google.com/group/victoriastv
>
>victo...@googlegroups.com
>
>Today's topics:
>
>* STV Vote in Davis, California Nov 7 - 1 messages, 1 author
>
http://groups.google.com/group/victoriastv/browse_thread/thread/c3a59c72cd8355d6
>
>=============================================================================
=
>TOPIC: STV Vote in Davis, California Nov 7
>http://groups.google.com/group/victoriastv/browse_thread/thread/c3a59c72cd835
5d6
>=============================================================================
=
>
>== 1 of 1 ==
>Date: Fri, Nov 3 2006 11:15 am
>From: "Ecosource Paper Inc."
>
>
>Hi all
>
>Oh, yes, the demand for changing the electoral systems in many US States is
>coming on very strong.
>
>For quite some time, my customers and potential customers in the USA do envy
>the very provinces that have made preparation to change the electoral
>systems over here.
>
>Ever since my company has been exporting tree-free paper, all of those
>interested represent people who care dearly for the environment and justice.
>These targeted individuals, businesses and environmental organizations are
>the strongest advocates for change, hence in particular along the West
>Coast. I have heard so many complaints over and over as to how powerless
>they feel and if possible a move to Canada would not be the last thing to
>think about. There is growing concern about vote rigging and money involved
>to buy an election.
>
>This is just to say, good for those courageous people to fight the odds. And
>good for Canada to have at least some hope for changes soon to come and to
>show leadership by inspiring others down South to do the same.
>
>Since my contacts in the USA are quite significant, I will try to find out
>the mood down there. - I keep you posted.
>
>Odette Kalman
>
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thought you'd be interested in knowing that there's going to be a vote
>> on using STV in Davis, California next Tuesday - see
>> http://davischoicevoting.org for details.
>>
>> This is not technically a vote to adopt STV, but potentially to advise
>> city council that citizens wish to use STV; Davis would have to change
>> its city status or apply to the state for permission to actually use
>> STV. Nonetheless, it's an interesting test case and may well result in
>> an actual change. Apparently support is good (note the use of the term
>> 'choice voting' rather than STV), partly based on positive experiences
>> with single-member STV (sometimes known as IRV - instant runoff voting)
>> in San Francisco.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Antony Hodgson
>>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>=============================================================================
=
>
>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Victoria STV Yes"
>group.
>
>To post to this group, send email to victo...@googlegroups.com or visit
http://groups.google.com/group/victoriastv
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
victoriastv...@googlegroups.com
>
>To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
>http://groups.google.com/group/victoriastv/subscribe
>
>To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to ab...@googlegroups.com
>
>=============================================================================
=
>Google Groups: http://groups.google.com
Daniel Anthony Grice
governors, presidents (ask Al Gore's therapist), and if we ever made
the proper move to split our executive from legislative branch,
premier and prime minister. It ads a bit of legitimacy to elected
positions as the winner will nearly always be favoured by at least
50% of the population over the next closest rival, and gets rid of
the fear of voting splitting uses by leading parties to close the
door on the rise of smaller ones. (See the rise of Social Credit as
a backlash against the Tories and Conservative in 1950s BC)
However, while it increases legitimacy of the individual legislator
it does to little to address the idea of equal representation for
minorities and diverse culture. It occasionally can have the
opposite effect in that it can eliminate "accidental diversity"
caused via vote splitting, (the original intention of the 52
elections to keep out the ccf) thereby eliminating the important
deliberative aspect of diverse proportional representation.
An IRV in Vancouver for Major would have eliminated doubt on whether
James Green was a spoiler for the Jim Green mayorality run (was his
votes confusion, or were they a parking vote for anti-establishment,
nota voters). and may have also made a difference in 3 way splits in
North Van City, Coquitlam, Campbell River, Nanaimo, Abbotsford,
Salmon Arm, Williams Lake, Penticton, Vernon in which the leading
candidate was under 50% and had a close rival in 2nd place. (Salmon
Arm's Mayor won with only 25%!) and a few others were in the 30%
range. If we got IRV in place for a 2008 mayoralty run, it may show
people the ease of which STV could work on a larger scale.
-Dan Grice