Alan McIntire wrote:

> We already have proportional representation.
>
> Just redraw the districts sensibly.

Yes, redraw the districts sensibly. No, we don't have proportional
representation. This is done on a party basis with all available
seats (that is, elections are multi-seat or multi-member elections)
and seats are apportioned to the various parties based on the
proportionate share of the vote each party got in the election.

That the people themselves have party choices and that might
constitute an alternative definition of proportional (or to use a
different word, "proportionate") representation, I do not deny, but
that is not the definition of proportional representation.


Dave Simpson

david_l_simpson@yahoo.com (Dave Simpson) wrote in message news:<23e7f86e.0307051223.1a68c701@posting.google. com>...
> Alan McIntire wrote:
>
> > We already have proportional representation.
> >
> > Just redraw the districts sensibly.
>
> Yes, redraw the districts sensibly. No, we don't have proportional
> representation. (cut)
> >
> Dave Simpson

In the house of representatives we DO have proportional
representation- by population.

For more on possible voting systems, see below. As I said before,
my own preference is for a "Thomas Hare" type selection system.-A.
McIntre

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/voting_system