User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
(start page) |
(add refs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Origin |
==Origin== |
||
The first suggestion for squaring votes before assigning seats in proportion to these squares appears to have been made by Julian Wiseman in 2000, proposing the system to elect the UK Westminster parliament. In May 2010, Rod Stringer offered improvements that would make the system more practical and politically acceptable, and this version of the system was later simplified. |
The first suggestion for squaring votes before assigning seats in proportion to these squares appears to have been made by Julian Wiseman in 2000, proposing the system to elect the UK Westminster parliament.<ref>{{cite web |first=Julian |last=Wiseman |title=PR-Squared: A New Description |url=http://www.jdawiseman.com/papers/electsys/pr2.html |date=September 1, 2001}}</ref> In May 2010, Rod Stringer{{efn|using the internet handle ''RodCrosby''}} offered improvements that would make the system more practical and politically acceptable, and this version of the system was later simplified.<ref>{{cite web |first=Rod |last=Stringer |title=AS PR BECOMES CENTRE STAGE – WHAT ABOUT THIS |url=https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/05/10/as-pr-becomes-centre-stage-what-about-this/ |date=May 10, 2010}}</ref> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
Stringer believes that a combination of political vested interest and inability to agree on one of the various true proportional systems means that it is unlikely that the UK will ever abandon FPTP for Westminster. PR squared is a system that is a relatively small change from the perspective of voters and the major parties, has some benefits for almost all parties, and accordingly may stand a higher chance of achieving consensus for its adoption. While not closely proportional, PR squared can be shown to be about half as disproportional as FPTP, according to certain common measures, in particular treating third and fourth parties which compete UK-wide more fairly. The prospect of majority government on a minority of votes remains quite possible, and in large part PR squared is advocated for pragmatic reasons. |
Stringer believes that a combination of political vested interest and inability to agree on one of the various true proportional systems means that it is unlikely that the UK will ever abandon FPTP for Westminster. PR squared is a system that is a relatively small change from the perspective of voters and the major parties, has some benefits for almost all parties, and accordingly may stand a higher chance of achieving consensus for its adoption. While not closely proportional, PR squared can be shown to be about half as disproportional as FPTP, according to certain common measures, in particular treating third and fourth parties which compete UK-wide more fairly. The prospect of majority government on a minority of votes remains quite possible, and in large part PR squared is advocated for pragmatic reasons. |
||
==Links== |
|||
== References == |
|||
<references/> |
|||
==Footnotes== |
|||
Revision as of 07:56, 11 January 2023
Quota proportional representation squared (QPR2), also known simply as PR squared or PR^2, is an electoral system designed to produce semi-proportional election results across a region by electing two representatives in each of the region’s districts. The 1st seat in every district is awarded to the party or candidate which receives the most votes, similar to first-past-the-post voting (FPTP). The 2nd seat is awarded to one of the remaining district parties or candidates so that squared proportionality is achieved across the region, using a calculation that aims to award parties their seats in the districts where they had their strongest performances, relative to the Droop quota.
Origin
The first suggestion for squaring votes before assigning seats in proportion to these squares appears to have been made by Julian Wiseman in 2000, proposing the system to elect the UK Westminster parliament.[1] In May 2010, Rod Stringer[2] offered improvements that would make the system more practical and politically acceptable, and this version of the system was later simplified.[3]
Objectives and rationale
Stringer believes that a combination of political vested interest and inability to agree on one of the various true proportional systems means that it is unlikely that the UK will ever abandon FPTP for Westminster. PR squared is a system that is a relatively small change from the perspective of voters and the major parties, has some benefits for almost all parties, and accordingly may stand a higher chance of achieving consensus for its adoption. While not closely proportional, PR squared can be shown to be about half as disproportional as FPTP, according to certain common measures, in particular treating third and fourth parties which compete UK-wide more fairly. The prospect of majority government on a minority of votes remains quite possible, and in large part PR squared is advocated for pragmatic reasons.
Links
References
- ↑ Wiseman, Julian (September 1, 2001). "PR-Squared: A New Description".
- ↑
- ↑ Stringer, Rod (May 10, 2010). "AS PR BECOMES CENTRE STAGE – WHAT ABOUT THIS".