Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Are you suggesting that a close matching of the wishes of voters to the outcome of an election is somehow less than desirable? I'm confused. If I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that disproportional representation, skewed to maintain someone's chosen values, is the better alternative.
|
I think he's saying that, if you really want to find a close matching of the outcome of elections to the wishes of voters -- keep sensible districts and use multi-member districts, and/or use a PR system with one statewide "district" (i.e the 22 Texas representatives allocated among parties by a PR system based on the total votes statewide.)
He's suggesting that such a system would be preferable to distorting voting districts beyond all rational comprehension and then claiming to reflect the will of the voters just because the number of R's/D's elected statewide is closer to the % of votes cast statewide -- while at the same time some communities may be almost entirely deprived of the power to influence the choice of their legislator.
S_A_M
