tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post2259509296807896650..comments2024-03-29T01:33:01.670+00:00Comments on SCOT goes POP!: Proposal for a reformed voting system : the Single Proxy VoteJames Kellyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-66015997652150823792016-05-05T10:43:21.765+01:002016-05-05T10:43:21.765+01:00@John
My intention is not to attempt to arbitraril...@John<br />My intention is not to attempt to arbitrarily dismantle. Instead it is to “what if...” The idea of a “list race” comes down to perceptions. If you only have one vote but also a choice of where to cast that vote then polarising interests or circumstances could end up mitigating certain voting patterns.<br /><br />With the benefit of a day or two of reflection I believe that Scotland is certainly too large geographically for a single constituency d'Hondt à la Israel. Instead I would probably favour a single vote, single tier election with a regional list d'Hondt, roughly on the terms of the current list regions with a population weighted number of mandates. <br /><br />Currently each region returns between 14 and 16 MSPs but that would need adjustment for population weighting. However the allocation of seats could remain fluid dependent upon the electoral roll prior to an election i.e. the number of seats per region would only be finally settled when the number of voters eligible for any given election has been settled at the registration cut-off date.Albannach Thall Thairishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172122159956392615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-16179176846198101492016-05-05T08:04:27.985+01:002016-05-05T08:04:27.985+01:00It is a problem, especially for depopulated areas ...It is a problem, especially for depopulated areas (cf Scotland vs SE England) however it is easily dealt with. You could require two types of majority - members and voting strength. In a way you get a house of reps and a sentate in one. <br />The way to deal with the problem of stalemate is to give one side the upper hand so that the members thing is more of a veto and might require more than a simple majority (don't you just hate the abuse of the term absolute majority for slender simple majorities e.g. 50.1%).McCafferyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01873464074643303862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-48306490619272995772016-05-05T00:16:40.983+01:002016-05-05T00:16:40.983+01:00"a minority of MSPs with a majority of votes&..."a minority of MSPs with a majority of votes" - Yes, I think that might well be the result. I don't see that as a problem though. The MSPs with a higher number of votes to cast got them by being more successful personally in a constituency and/or representing a more successful party and/or having contested a larger constituency.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18083254826930498628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-81170535290799005902016-05-04T23:53:06.845+01:002016-05-04T23:53:06.845+01:00Since drafting this article article it had occurre...Since drafting this article article it had occurred to me that another (omitted) advantage would be that if you were, say an SNP voter, but had an absolute personal objection to the SNP constituency candidate, you should be able to cast your single vote against the SNP list rather than the constituency candidate - i.e. you can make your point against the individual, while the party still benefits by exactly +1 vote. <br /><br />I hadn't thought about whether this might occur on a large scale. Suppose a constituency was pro-SNP but had a very unpopular SNP candidate, we might we get SNP constuency 10,000, SNP list 15,000, Labour constituency 15,000, Labour list 5,000. The constituency would return a Labour constituency MSP, but would still add more voting power in the parliament to SNP. That doesn't appear to me as a problem. Everyone gets what they deserve out of the vote.<br /><br />I don't follow why you think a "list race" might emerge. There is no benefit/disbenefit to the party whether the vote is constituency or list, no magic %age threshold to hit, not advantage to heading off another party by +1 vote other than another 1 vote (out of 2 million) in the parliament.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18083254826930498628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-25092199189260040312016-05-04T12:02:06.307+01:002016-05-04T12:02:06.307+01:00My suggestion is that the state pay for and/or ext...My suggestion is that the state pay for and/or extend an open source voting system. They should pay several teams of academics to audit the code. This could be done by a consortium of states. They should specify the type of machine hardware to be used and apply the appropriate physical tamper-proofing. The could lead to local companies providing the hardware, lead to diversity of systems and help local economies.<br /><br />The system should be touch screen and simple to use and internationalised (multiple languages) and also accessible for the disabled.<br />At the end of the voting process (cryptographically secured of course) there should be a two part print out. The voter then verifies that the paper matches what they choose and keep one part and place the second part in the ballot box. The second part should be both human and machine readable so that verification can be both automated and done by hand.<br /><br />This makes voting easier for voters, leads to quick results, allows for complicated voting systems but most importantly of all - can be challenged.<br /><br />The USA experience of electronic and automated voting is not a happy one.McCafferyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01873464074643303862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-34728160848183173042016-05-04T11:32:14.927+01:002016-05-04T11:32:14.927+01:00@Graeme
Excellent and valuable technical info. As...@Graeme<br /><br />Excellent and valuable technical info. As you rightly point out the Estonian authorities are pro-active in improving encryption. And you are right about Russia, there is undoubtedly an entire FSB directorate dedicated to undermining the Baltic States. However it is no coincidence that the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence is based in Tallinn.<br /><br />We must not be afraid of technology and shy away from it in our threadbare analog fortresses, not that you suggest that. Instead we need to be aware of what technology offers and leverage it to our advantage.Albannach Thall Thairishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172122159956392615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-58355808811176372062016-05-04T10:37:37.025+01:002016-05-04T10:37:37.025+01:00@ Scottish economic...
The Estonian system has a l...@ Scottish economic...<br />The Estonian system has a lot going for it and shows that the fears of an ID card need not be overblown if the system is designed for aiding the citizen rather than the bureaucracy. For example I love their ability to review who has been looking at their records.<br /><br />Now when it comes to elections, smart card auth is good but you have to bear in mind that not all cards may be up to the latest specifications for signing. For example in 2015 they decided (correctly) to retire certificates that were hashed with SHA-1 as this has known weaknesses. It will take time to replace the old cards. The new standard will be the ESTEID-SK 2015, a 4096-bit RSA key and use SHA-384. how long that will last is not known - presuming that the TLA agencies will have quantum computing long before the rest of us, you can be sure that they'll have the capability to steal elections before organised crime does. I'm sure that Russia will attempt this against Estonia. Without a paper back up, they will never even know. There's also the possibility that compromised software can be installed that uses the genuine cert but tricks the user into thinking that they'll be voting for who they think. This would be detectable if suspected but would it be suspected?? Then there are numerous potential problems with the infrastructure and processing power needed - so DDOS.<br /><br />There's ways to reduce this with block chain technology - there's a barcelona company trying just that - but it will always be an issue without the paper trail. it has the potential to undermine trust in the ballot.<br /><br />Now this is not a call to not modernise the system but to be careful about putting your trust in technology that few understand.<br /><br />Finally the idea of increasing the voting and moving to a more direct democracy. There are fundamental issues about this - e.g. people might not wisely consider their vote. There is also the question of what democracy is - majoritarian rule or a system to shuffle elites and veto unpopular policies...<br />McCafferyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01873464074643303862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-33613565866386234822016-05-04T09:58:09.528+01:002016-05-04T09:58:09.528+01:00@ Graeme
The Estonian system of voting allows fo...@ Graeme <br /><br />The Estonian system of voting allows for remote e-voting by digital signature using the voter's encrypted personal ID card. However rather than increase the risk of fraud the opposite is true. But the key to secure voting must always start with positive identification of the electors unlike the nonsense in this country which has been discredited by election monitors many times over as unfit for purpose.<br /><br />What e-voting dispenses with is the need for – and risk of manipulation with – postal or proxy ballots as the voter can participate in an election from absolutely anywhere at home or abroad as long as he/she has internet access.<br /><br />Whilst Britain struggles with the shadow of suspected postal vote manipulation over 30% of votes cast in the 2015 Estonian General Election were done so electronically.<br /><br />Curiously it is also possible to alter one’s vote in that one can log in and re-vote as often as one likes but only the final choice counts towards the electoral total.Albannach Thall Thairishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172122159956392615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-69874556142910618142016-05-04T08:47:28.770+01:002016-05-04T08:47:28.770+01:00Unless you can secure it, electronic voting has th...Unless you can secure it, electronic voting has the potential to allow the easiest coup d'etat ever.<br />No electronic system can be the way you want it as it must have a voter verified paper trail (and I mean real paper, not a virtualized one).<br />Not to mention that the secrecy of the ballot box is also in question.<br />It certainly has to be open source, cos do you really want to trust the system to a potentially biased corporation like Diebold?McCafferyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01873464074643303862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-33965930600820519152016-05-04T05:10:14.943+01:002016-05-04T05:10:14.943+01:00My own preference is to introduce electronic votin...My own preference is to introduce electronic voting for the electorate. Vote often and regularly on many issues, not just once every four years, and gradually reduce the need for politicians at all. It requires a well informed and motivated electorate, but electronic voting has the potential to be the biggest advance in democracy since universal suffrage.Craig Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-32832366375823276122016-05-03T19:46:14.987+01:002016-05-03T19:46:14.987+01:00I very much welcome a discussion about a better el...I very much welcome a discussion about a better electoral system, but I must admit I'm a bit boring – I'd rather adopt a tried and tested system from elsewhere.<br /><br />My preference would be one of the following two options: (1) Fix the AMS system used for Holyrood by adding "overhang seats" (extra seats when a party has got too many constituency seats) – this is what happens in Germany and New Zealand, where AMS has been used for many years. (2) Introduce the system used in Denmark, which is basically d'Hondt (like we know it from European elections) with personal votes – instead of voting for a party, you vote for a person within a party; your vote then gets used twice (once to determine the number of seats each party gets, and again to determine who gets elected within each party).<br /><br />I also think we should ideally use the same voting system for all elections – it's barking mad to use four different systems within one country (AMS for Holyrood, STV for councils, d'Hondt for the European Parliament, and FPTP for Westminster).Thomas Widmannhttp://www.arcofprosperity.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-9763546107687887652016-05-03T18:10:39.974+01:002016-05-03T18:10:39.974+01:00Sounds a bit like the wonderful model of the US pa...Sounds a bit like the wonderful model of the US party conventions in terms of weighted and/or split voting. <br /><br />I would point out a couple of things though. <br /><br />Firstly, representatives elected from more populous constituencies are far more likely to have a larger voting mandate than those from smaller and, maybe typically, insular constituencies so there will likely always be a perceived bias of the urban over the rural.<br /><br />Secondly there is the potential, albeit ever so infinitesimally unlikely, scenario that nobody votes in a particular electoral category. For instance a list race could be regarded as so critical that nobody risks voting on the constituency level even on a high turnout. Or the other way around with constituencies eclipsing lists. Highly unlikely of course but we have to consider all the potentialities.<br /><br />My own feeling is that this proposed system is a very minority flavour. However I will defend John’s right to suggest this and any other model in terms of creating debate. My personal preference is for d’Hondt in the Israeli model where the country is one huge multi-member constituency and seats are allocated to match the vote in a truly proportional manner as ably explained by James in his recent film. I get the impression that in our modern interconnected world the “local” representative is becoming less important but that’s probably just my spin having lived in Estonia for 20+years where the country is spilt into 12 multi-member constituencies and the place I live has 8 MPs. That’s d’Hondt as well! 🙂Albannach Thall Thairishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172122159956392615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-48005286929722779602016-05-03T18:05:03.357+01:002016-05-03T18:05:03.357+01:00It has interesting repercussions for lobbying, too...It has interesting repercussions for lobbying, too.<br /><br />I'm not afraid of complex numbers, but expecting parliamentary votes to regularly add up to 2 million is startling to say the least. Not really a problem though, I believe Holyrood already uses electronic voting - this system would still be vastly quicker than Westminister's divisions.<br /><br />A question, does SPV allow the possibility of a minority of MSPs with a majority of votes? Something like 60 MSPs with 1.2 million votes between them and 69 MSPs with 1 million between them?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-81254384933380100322016-05-03T17:10:50.554+01:002016-05-03T17:10:50.554+01:00MSPs could apportion their votes to different side...MSPs could apportion their votes to different sides of a parliamentary decision, depending on how they felt - eg 60% aye, 40% nay for something they kinda supported but not entirely :)commentorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10321173541321374705noreply@blogger.com