I would propose an improvement on Mixed-Member Proportional Representation I call Exact Proportional Representation. Instead of electing N representatives based on a district's population, elect one representative per party, perhaps with a party limit of 10.
Within each district, each party elects one representative using the Alternative Vote, a.k.a. Instant Runnoff. Let's say 15 parties run in a particular district, D1.
After the primaries, the voters rank the representatives of each party from 1 to N <= 10. I.e., each voter picks up to 10 representatives in his order of preference. Again, using Alternative Vote, the pool of representatives is reduced to N <= 10.
The ranking of each remaining representative is normalized on each ballet. E.g., if your number 1 choice is gone, but your number 2 choice is still in, then he becomes your number 1 choice.
With N <= 10 representatives, one for each of the N most popular parties, all representatives are assigned a seat in Congress for that district. However, each representative has a Voting Power, P, which is determined by the following formula.
P = voting population of district times the sum over 1 <= n <= N of sum over all ballets of his rank, R, multiplied by 2^-n.
For the less mathematically inclined, take a representative's rank on each ballot and award him
1/2 points for every time he's ranked first
1/4 points for every time he's ranked second
1/8 points for every time he's ranked third
1/2^-n points for every time he's ranked nth
Add up all those points and multiply by the number of votes in his district, and you have the number of votes he can cast, and yes, it will most likely be a fractional number.
Again, all the common voter has to do is rank his preferences. Everything else is done by software.
Exact Proportional Voting has several advantages over Mixed-Member Proportional Representation.
1. There is no approximation of the voter's choices due to rounding errors that are inevitable with one whole vote per seat and a finite number of seats.
2. A voter's second, third, fourth, etc. preferences are also weighed progressively less. This refinement ensures that the final result more accurately portrays voter sentiment.
3. Non-voting counts as a vote of no confidence. Each party and representative is now incentivized to get as many people to vote for him rather than just to beat his opponents. It's now in each representative's interest to get as many people as voting and people who choose not to vote drain power from all representatives in their district. For the non-voter, this means he can exercise power even by choosing not to vote.
4. Since each voter can elect to pick fewer than 10 choices, he can become a quasi-non-voter draining power from anyone he did not choose.
5. Districts with poor voter turnout are effectively the same as districts with lower populations. Let's say districts A and B have the same population. In district A, 100% of the population votes. In district B, 10% does. With all other voting systems, each voter in district B gets 10 times the representation as a voter in district A. With my system, voters in each district get the exact same representation. In effect, this also means that it does not matter if you live in a heavily populated district or a sparsely populated one because each voter for representative X gives a bit of voting power to that representative.
Of course, you don't have to have 10 parties and thus 10 seats per district. You could have 5 parties and 5 seats. The difference isn't much. Using 10 parties, the smallest bump in voting power is 1 in 2 to the 10th or 1/1024th of a vote. Using only 5 parties it is 1 in 2 to the 5th or 1/32nd of a vote. Adding more than 5 seats only slightly refines the ratios of power because of exponential decay.
6. Finally, Exact Proportional Voting is completely impervious to Gerrymandering as the final voting power of each party is utterly unaffected by where the lines are drawn.
The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained
http://www.s7tWHJfhiyo
The Alternative Vote Explained
http://www.3Y3jE3B8HsE
Gerrymandering Explained
http://www.Mky11UJb9AY
Mixed-Member Proportional Representation Explained
http://www.QT0I-sdoSXU
I would propose an improvement on Mixed-Member Proportional Representation I call Exact Proportional Representation. Instead of electing N representatives based on a district's population, elect one representative per party, perhaps with a party limit of 10.
Within each district, each party elects one representative using the Alternative Vote, a.k.a. Instant Runnoff. Let's say 15 parties run in a particular district, D1.
After the primaries, the voters rank the representatives of each party from 1 to N <= 10. I.e., each voter picks up to 10 representatives in his order of preference. Again, using Alternative Vote, the pool of representatives is reduced to N <= 10.
The ranking of each remaining representative is normalized on each ballet. E.g., if your number 1 choice is gone, but your number 2 choice is still in, then he becomes your number 1 choice.
With N <= 10 representatives, one for each of the N most popular parties, all representatives are assigned a seat in Congress for that district. However, each representative has a Voting Power, P, which is determined by the following formula.
P = voting population of district times the sum over 1 <= n <= N of sum over all ballets of his rank, R, multiplied by 2^-n.
For the less mathematically inclined, take a representative's rank on each ballot and award him
1/2 points for every time he's ranked first
1/4 points for every time he's ranked second
1/8 points for every time he's ranked third
1/2^-n points for every time he's ranked nth
Add up all those points and multiply by the number of votes in his district, and you have the number of votes he can cast, and yes, it will most likely be a fractional number.
Again, all the common voter has to do is rank his preferences. Everything else is done by software.
Exact Proportional Voting has several advantages over Mixed-Member Proportional Representation.
1. There is no approximation of the voter's choices due to rounding errors that are inevitable with one whole vote per seat and a finite number of seats.
2. A voter's second, third, fourth, etc. preferences are also weighed progressively less. This refinement ensures that the final result more accurately portrays voter sentiment.
3. Non-voting counts as a vote of no confidence. Each party and representative is now incentivized to get as many people to vote for him rather than just to beat his opponents. It's now in each representative's interest to get as many people as voting and people who choose not to vote drain power from all representatives in their district. For the non-voter, this means he can exercise power even by choosing not to vote.
4. Since each voter can elect to pick fewer than 10 choices, he can become a quasi-non-voter draining power from anyone he did not choose.
5. Districts with poor voter turnout are effectively the same as districts with lower populations. Let's say districts A and B have the same population. In district A, 100% of the population votes. In district B, 10% does. With all other voting systems, each voter in district B gets 10 times the representation as a voter in district A. With my system, voters in each district get the exact same representation. In effect, this also means that it does not matter if you live in a heavily populated district or a sparsely populated one because each voter for representative X gives a bit of voting power to that representative.
Of course, you don't have to have 10 parties and thus 10 seats per district. You could have 5 parties and 5 seats. The difference isn't much. Using 10 parties, the smallest bump in voting power is 1 in 2 to the 10th or 1/1024th of a vote. Using only 5 parties it is 1 in 2 to the 5th or 1/32nd of a vote. Adding more than 5 seats only slightly refines the ratios of power because of exponential decay.
6. Finally, Exact Proportional Voting is completely impervious to Gerrymandering as the final voting power of each party is utterly unaffected by where the lines are drawn.