Via Wilf Day, propagating the earlier planting on the Citizens Assembly in Ontario:
“We have a consensus.†By a secret ballot vote of 86 to 16, the Ontario Citizens’ Assembly prefers MMP to FPTP.
And on the overhang front, there will be no overhang hangovers in the referendum campiagn. They decided on staff advice that, even allowing for a five percent shift towards split ballots, only in the most exceptional cases would more than three overhangs arise in Ontario. Not worth arguing about. Gone.
Why five percent? Well, Massicotte’s survey of Germany, New Zealand, Scotland and Wales found “conflicting allegiances, even if held by many voters, tend to cancel each other out. So the net spread between the two standings of one party is usually not very great. Seldom does it exceed 4 percentage points.â€
Why is that they would be no overhangs in Ontario? How many FPTP seats are their going to be in relation to List seats? Why is overhang common in some MMP systems and not in others? I think their should be overhang seats just in case.
About the FPTP system for single member districts, I am surprise no one on the citizen assembly did not suggest the Alternative Vote. Although it probaly would not change election results or the proportionality of the list seats. At least a candidate elected in the SMD is elected with an absolute majority.
Seed planted by Suaprazzodi — 18 April 2007 @ 22:26
The option of using the alternative vote for single member districts was at least brought to the attention of the assembly, see the last page of this document (PDF). However, this decision wasn’t really a focus of debate.
Seed planted by vasi — 19 April 2007 @ 16:13
A final word on the topic of a better English word for “overhangmandates.” The OCA staff seem to call them “temporary seats” because seats are temporarily added. I like it.
Seed planted by Wilf Day — 03 May 2007 @ 01:02
One Ballot, Two Votes: A New Way to
Vote in Ontario.
“A Mixed Member Proportional system
gives you more choice.
Your ballot gives you two votes. You vote for the party of your choice and also for the local candidate you prefer. You can vote for a local candidate from a different party if you prefer.”
“Guiding Principle: Voter Choice
On one side of the ballot, you vote for the party you prefer. On the other side, you vote for a candidate to represent your local district. A Mixed Member Proportional ballot allows you to:
• vote for a candidate and for that candidate’s party
• vote for a candidate and for a different party
• vote for an independent candidate if one is running in your district and for a party
• vote for a party even if that party does not have a candidate running in your district
• cast only one vote – either for a candidate or for a party – without spoiling your ballot.
Guiding Principle: Simplicity and Practicality
The Assembly wanted any new electoral system for Ontario to be easy to understand and practical to implement. Giving voters two votes on a single ballot is a simple and practical way to increase voter choice and achieve fairer election results, without changing the way local members are elected.
Guiding Principle: Accountability
The new system provides two kinds of accountability: At election time, voters can hold their local representatives accountable and hold parties accountable by directly determining the share of seats each party wins.”
Seed planted by Wilf Day — 16 May 2007 @ 03:40