Is that good or bad?
Electoral Reform
Key: FPPTP = First Past the Post; AMS = Additional Member System; SYV = Single Transferable Vote; JAV+ = Jenkins Alternate Vote Plus; PLS = Party List System; CC = Cellular Constituencies. For explanations of these systems, please read the electoral reform FAQ.
FPPTP -15  |
|
| AMS -9 |
|
 STV 9 |
|
| JAV+ -19 |
|
| PLS 38 |
|
| CC 45 |
You should support: Cellular Constituencies (CC). Each voter casts a single vote for a party with the number of seats in the House of Commons a party wins being directly proportional to its share of the vote. The country is split into constituency cells for each party, their size dependent upon the number of MPs the party has, and the local parties within these cells select the candidate to represent them. Every voter therefore has an MP representing their area from a party for which they have voted. CC is certain to deliver coalition governments.
Take the test at Who Should You Vote For
***
I know I want an ice cream. I really, really want an ice cream. But there’s so many flavours and people keep crowding around me and shouting which flavour they think is the nicest. The room’s spinning and I feel a bit queasy.
Posted on June 3rd, 2005 at 4:52pm under Uncategorized
| Related posts... • Marginal seats and Tory money again • Still the best democracy money can buy. • A Proportional Response |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 3 Comments |
But all you really need to focus on is that the current system sucks and needs changing. Just about anything, heck drawing lots, would be better than what we have now.
CC, by the way, wouldn’t be my choice. Way too complicated. I like PLS and STV, though I will trot away now to check that I do actually like those, don’t just think I do. Like pistachio ice cream.
I prefer STV.
Alternatively, we could have CDMA cellular constituencies: the size of the constituency would fluctuate depending on the number of voters for a particular party (/geek)
In fact that isn’t such a bad idea…