NationStates Jolt Archive

This is very rough and needs debate

Points like:

1. Realising plurality voting systems such as first-past-the-post do not always represent citizens justly in Parliament. For example they cause 'wasted votes', apathy, unfair allocation of seats and a two-party system.

2. Demanding that a more proportional form of voting be established

3. Allowing plurality voting systems for non-national councils and legislatures

4. Allowing national legislatures/councils to be elected via PVS is the majority are elected in another, more proportional form.

5. Implementing that all national legislatures/councils shall hereby be elected either:

a) Via full proportional voting system or;
b) A mixture of plurality and proportional aslong as the majority of seats are elected via proportional.

6. Noting this does not affect any states which are not Democratic or part of the United Nations

7. Defining a 'proportional voting system' as one, or several, of the following:

preferential voting,
mixed-member,
party-list,
STV,
parallel voting,
STNV, and,
cumulative voting.

8. Advising other bodies be elected in a jair, just and democratic way.

Many of those alternate voting systems are too complicated for the avergae voter. For example the Single Transferable Vote or STV is not used ofte due to its complexity of redistributing the votes. A compromise could be AMS, a hybrid system of First Past The Post and a list system

What I don't understand is why you mandate a system for democracies - yet allow absolute autocracies to continue unperturbed.

Of course, I know you have to do that, on account of the Ideological Ban clause - but as such, will this proposal actually make things any fairer?

Many of those alternate voting systems are too complicated for the avergae voter. For example the Single Transferable Vote or STV is not used ofte due to its complexity of redistributing the votes. A compromise could be AMS, a hybrid system of First Past The Post and a list system
STV isn't too complicated for voters. All they have to do is rank the candidates, and the government/computer does the rest.

Also, I don't see what this would help, or why plurality systems are all bad -- Ceorana uses a combination of first-past-the-post and STV for our national Congress, and first-past-the-post for our president. You can't use proportional representation for a president/national leader/whatever: there's only one of them.

STV isn't too complicated for voters. All they have to do is rank the candidates, and the government/computer does the rest.

Also, I don't see what this would help, or why plurality systems are all bad -- Ceorana uses a combination of first-past-the-post and STV for our national Congress, and first-past-the-post for our president. You can't use proportional representation for a president/national leader/whatever: there's only one of them.

Just concerns legislatures/councils.

Just concerns legislatures/councils.
Argh. You're right. Didn't catch that.

1. I really don't think it is the place of the United Nations to dictate to member states how their leaders ought to be chosen;
2. You keep using chiefly British political terms ("First Past the Post," etc., and we don't even have local "councils" in America);
3. Any democratic nation may get out of the terms of this mandate by outlawing elections, declaring itself "non-democratic," and choosing leaders via caucus;
4. What is wrong with a two-party system, anyway? It encourages moderatation and pragmatism, and compels major parties to reach out to moderates and independents.

The current discussion shows the untenable position of democracies - that you must have a system to appease the masses and make them look like they have a say in governing. At least those countries lke the Armed Republic of Utskistan are truthful with our citizens - they have the rights we give them. No voting - no elections.

We in Utskistan will continue governing while you in your so called democracies continue with your elaborate charades.

Kubula Khan
UN Ambassador for Life
Armed Republic of Utskistan

Okay, first thing I think this proposal needs is a definition clause for the different forms of voting style. Secondly I think there should be a significant attachment to this proposal (if it's going to retain the title) about voting methods and ballots and counters. Say defining certain ballot types and what ones can't be used, vote counting procedures, tainted vote/corruption prevention, citiczen vote limitation rules (so nobody can deny women the vote etc...) and other things along those lines which fit more with the "Fair Voting System" title.

This is very rough and needs debate

Points like:

1. Realising plurality voting systems such as first-past-the-post do not always represent citizens justly in Parliament. For example they cause 'wasted votes', apathy, unfair allocation of seats and a two-party system.

2. Demanding that a more proportional form of voting be established

3. Allowing plurality voting systems for non-national councils and legislatures

4. Allowing national legislatures/councils to be elected via PVS is the majority are elected in another, more proportional form.

5. Implementing that all national legislatures/councils shall hereby be elected either:

a) Via full proportional voting system or;
b) A mixture of plurality and proportional aslong as the majority of seats are elected via proportional.

6. Noting this does not affect any states which are not Democratic or part of the United Nations

7. Defining a 'proportional voting system' as one, or several, of the following:

preferential voting,
mixed-member,
party-list,
STV,
parallel voting,
STNV, and,
cumulative voting.

8. Advising other bodies be elected in a jair, just and democratic way.

Damnit! FPTP is a great electoral system, which is why we use it in Compadria. Why does everyone have to disparage it so much.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Unacceptable meddling.
Also, it seems to mandate that all members of democratic nations' legislatures must be elected despite the fact that some nations' legislatures currently include chambers with non-elected members (OOC: such as hereditary peers, 'life peers', 'law lords' & other ex-officio members, or appointed 'senators'...) as well as elected chambers...

Unacceptable meddling.
This coming from the delegate currently peddling his "Democracy And Aids: The Sensible Choice" proposal, or whatever it's called. Hyprocrisy, thy name is...er...I never did find out the name of your ambassador. So "that one over there in the funny hat".

This coming from the delegate currently peddling his "Democracy And Aids: The Sensible Choice" proposal, or whatever it's called. Hyprocrisy, thy name is...er...I never did find out the name of your ambassador. So "that one over there in the funny hat".

"Sigh..."
How many more times do I have to point out that the proposal in this category that was submitted originally by St Edmund & more recently by St Edmundan Antarctic was only to provide help for any nations that actually wanted to become more democratic, or to prove their democratic status, and didn't try to force anything on anybody?

Alfred Sweynsson MD,
Ambassador to the UN
for the Protectorate of St Edmundan Antarctic
(& formerly for the Kingdom of St Edmund...)

Alfred Sweynsson MD,
Ambassador to the UN
for the Protectorate of St Edmundan Antarctic
(& formerly for the Kingdom of St Edmund...)

Speaking of which, what happened to the Kingdom, nothing to cataclysmic I hope?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Speaking of which, what happened to the Kingdom, nothing to cataclysmic I hope?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

All fire and brimstone, I think. :p

Bah, fire and brimstone are harmless. I fear nukes and napalm myself.

As for this resolution, like I said I think it should be re-drafted to focus on fair election policy in regards to vote-counting, who can vote, ballot clarity, and corruption prevention as opposed to forceing a given voting system on a nation.

Speaking of which, what happened to the Kingdom, nothing to cataclysmic I hope?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.


It's still out there, but after all our complaints about the potential ill-effects of certain clauses in the 'Patients Rights Act' the government felt that it would have looked a bit silly for the country to remain within the UN once that resolution had been passed...

This is so not within the purview of the UN.
Not only are you assuming that every nation is a democracy (they aren't), you are actually proposing the voting system to which all UN members must adhere.
What about our resident evil dictatorships? First past the post works just fine for them, as there is only one contender: the dictator.
It's a bad idea. Should it come to a vote (which seems unlikely) I will not be supporting it.

--Rooty

How exactly would a proportional voting system work in a non-party democratic system? Say the People's Assembly of Enn. First past the post in the 150 electorates is the only working system we've been able to come up with, and we've tried an awful lot of systems.