Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hcr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!hcr!jimr
From: jimr@hcr.UUCP (Jim Robinson)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: N.B. Elections
Message-ID: <2885@hcr.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Oct-87 10:28:58 EST
Article-I.D.: hcr.2885
Posted: Fri Oct 23 10:28:58 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Oct-87 14:24:51 EST
References: <1168@water.waterloo.edu> <1665@ubc-cs.UUCP> <1010@utflis.UUCP> <1051@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: jimr@hcr.UUCP (Jim Robinson)
Distribution: can
Organization: HCR Corporation, Toronto
Lines: 15
Summary: 

In article <1051@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>After the election, PV would be tallied for each group.
>Assume a house of 100 members for simplicity.  A group with 35% of the vote
>would get to name 35 members to that house, from their own pre-selected
>hierarchy.  After all integer portions are taken care of by parties with
>1% or greater of the vote, the remaining fractional percentages (and parties
>with <1%) would be sorted in order, and remaining seats would be assigned.

What seems to me to be a reasonable compromise is to have a threshold
which a party has to reach in order to qualify for seats. In West
Germany 5% is required. That way extreme fringe and/or frivolous groups
are excluded, yet proportional representation is, for the most part,
achieved.

J.B. Robinson