this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
27 points (81.4% liked)

Fair Vote Canada

161 readers
33 users here now

What is This Group is About?/De Quoi Parle ce Groupe?

The unofficial Lemmy movement to bring proportional representation to all levels of government in Canada.

Voters deserve more choice and accountability from all politicians.

Le mouvement non officiel de Lemmy visant à amener la représentation proportionnelle à tous les niveaux de gouvernement au Canada.

Les électeurs méritent davantage de choix et de responsabilité de la part de tous les politiciens.


Related Communities/Communautés Associées

Resources/Ressources

Official Organizations/Organisations Officielles


We're looking for more moderators, especially those who are of French and indigenous identities.

Nous recherchons davantage de modérateurs, notamment ceux qui sont d'identité française et autochtone.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
 
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

In Oregon, Measure 117 on the ballot this year will institute RA ked choice voting statewide. Portland already has it for the 2024 municipal elections, and it'll go into effect countrywide for Multnomah County elections in 2026. Very exciting stuff!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

STV is a kind of ranked ballot voting system. In the US the term “ranked choice” usually refers to instant runoff voting which is similar to STV but uses a different mechanism for assigning votes so could produce different results. I’m not familiar enough with either to say which is better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

STV is for elections with multiple seats, while instant runoff is for a single winner.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

Whichever one is going to get quickest adopted and replace FPTP is better, I think.

I would rather achieve an 80% solution as opposed to failing to achieve the 100% solution because all the energy was spent in squabbling among different better solutions.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The LPC campaigned on 2015 being the last election under FPP, along with ensuring "every vote counts".

When you say "make every vote count" this necessarily means proportional representation (PR). PR is the only viable long term solution being pushed by electoral reform advocates. Some examples of PR electoral systems:

Trudeau has only ever (secretly) wanted instant runoff voting (IRV) to replace the current first past the post (FPP). So when the tide shifted against him, he broke his election promise and bailed on electoral reform.

In either IRV or FPP, many votes will not count at all (>=50%). So neither IRV nor FPP satisfy the criteria for proportional representation (PR).

Note: lots of people use the term "ranked ballot", but this is inaccurate. Ranked ballot is simply a mechanism, and not an electoral system. For example, both IRV and STV use the ranking mechanism, but only STV is considered PR.

So while Trudeau was pushing for "ranked ballot", along with the "make every vote count" messaging, people are right to infer that STV would be implemented. STV uses ranked ballot but is still considered PR.

So that's 4 electoral systems:

  1. First-past-the-post (FPP)
  2. Instant-runoff voting (IRV)
  3. Mixed member proportional (MMP)
  4. Single transferable vote (STV)

Only MMP and STV are considered PR!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Ungh, this post was so well-written and thoroughly cited I think I just climaxed

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ah I see, IRV is still majoritarian meaning that a minority of votes still doesn't get represented.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
  1. IRV and STV both use "ranked ballots".
  2. IRV is not PR, STV is PR.
  3. Trudeau only wanted IRV, so he kept saying "ranked ballot". However, electoral reform proponents want "every vote to count" just like the LPC campaigned on.
  4. The House of Commons Special Committee on Electoral Reform (ERRE) recommends PR and does not recommend IRV. Therefore, Trudeau kills electoral reform, claiming a "lack of consensus".
  5. End of this story, but not the end of PR.
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Similar story in the UK. The ruling party wants PR (the membership voted in favour), but the PM does not. It could still be forced through via a private members bill

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Thank you for this informative comment!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Use the right tool for the right job.