Multi-member system: Difference between revisions
→Local District Clusters vs Multi-Member Districts
(→Pros: Fixed typos and edited for clarity. Deleted off-topic comments about candidates address rules, as determining who is eligible to run in each district is a separate consideration and finer detail.) |
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 45:
For example: In a five winner election, five single-member districts would be linked into a cluster. As usual, most major parties could still be expected to run five candidates. In this “Local” system, each candidate would be elected to a specific single-member district inside their cluster. Using votes from the cluster's full electorate, the first winner would be selected and would be designated as the winner in their home district. All other candidates running in that district would then be eliminated, and the selection rounds would continue until all the seats have been filled and until each district has a designated representative.
All multi-winner voting methods, including multi-member and proportional methods, can be adapted to run in local clusters. The purported inventor of this alternative is Byron Becker for his [http://localpr.ca/basics/overview/ Local PR system]. Although, it is unclear if [[Fair majority voting]] which also uses Local District Clusters predates [http://localpr.ca/basics/overview/ Local PR system] or not.
===Pros===
| |||