Here's the link to an 8-page PDF (Acrobat) document I wrote recently. It's titled "Proportional Representation In The USA." http://www.votefair.org/proportional_representation_usa.pdf This document answers the question "Which PR methods do you recommend?" which came from an organization that is seeking to better understand election-method reforms in the United States. A shortened version, without formatting and without the three tables, follows my signature. Anyone is welcome to share this document with people who are interested in how PR can be implemented in the United States. As always, constructive feedback is welcome. Richard Fobes The VoteFair guy Author of the book "Ending The Hidden Unfairness In U.S. Elections" ................. highlights ................ Title: "Proportional Representation In The USA" [...] The PR method recommended in this document, which does not have a name, uses the best elements from the most popular PR methods already in use by various nations. Yet the recommended combination differs from what any nation currently uses. A later section ("Why Many Nations Still Use Primitive PR Methods") explains why this gap occurs. Step One: Ranked Ballots, And More Nominees Three election-method changes are needed before the United States can adopt a well-designed PR method. * Ranked ballots. Voters and election officials need to gain experience marking and counting ranked ballots in both primary elections and general elections. On a ranked ballot the voter indicates their first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on. * Good vote-counting method. Ranked Choice Including Pairwise Elimination (RCIPE) or some other good vote-counting method (possibly a Condorcet method) needs to be used to count the ranked ballots. Instant-runoff voting (IRV) does not qualify because it too often yields unfair results. (STAR voting does not qualify because it uses rating ballots, not ranked ballots.) * Multiple nominees. The Republican and Democratic primary elections must nominate two (or more) candidates per party to compete in the general election. If the RCIPE vote-counting method is used, the candidate who is eliminated last (just before identifying the single remaining candidate) deserves to be the party’s second nominee. Step Two: Two Representatives Per District Plus Statewide Representatives After voters and election officials have gained experience using ranked ballots in both primary elections and general elections, three more changes are needed. * Two representatives per district. Each district will elect two representatives. Both winners will represent the citizens in their district. Typically the two representatives will be from different political parties. * Favorite party. Each voter will answer the question "Which political party is your favorite?" This easy-to-answer ballot question is common in many nations, but it will be a new concept for US voters. * Statewide representatives. Some statewide representatives will be elected to represent voters who, according to their favorite-party ballot marks, are not well-represented by the district-specific representatives. The choice of representatives to fill these party-specific seats will be done using the available ballot information, without any influence from political-party insiders. After the PR changes, the legislature will have two kinds of legislative seats. * District-specific seats. Most representatives (about 80 to 85 percent) will get elected to this kind of seat. * Statewide seats. These seats compensate for any political parties that fail to win as many district-specific seats as would be expected based on how many voters prefer each political party. Second-Most Representative Versus Second-Most Popular The most confusing part of understanding PR is that there are two different kinds of "popularity." * Runner-up candidate. A candidate who is second-most popular in a primary election is the runner-up candidate who could replace the winning candidate if the winner was disqualified or became unavailable. * Second-most representative candidate. A candidate who is second-most popular in a general election is the strongest opponent to the winning candidate, and represents an entirely different group of voters compared to the winner. This kind of popularity is named second-most representative to distinguish it from the ambiguous term second-most popular. Filling The Legislative Seats Within each district, the winner of the first district-specific seat will be the candidate who is most popular in that district. The winner of the second district-specific seat will be the second-most representative candidate. This is the candidate who is most popular among the voters who are not well-represented by the first-seat winner. The statewide seats are awarded to candidates who were not popular enough to win a district seat, yet are the most popular candidates associated with the political parties that did not win enough district-specific seats. (Specifically a statewide seat is awarded to any qualifying candidate in any district who received the most first-choice votes from voters who also marked the seat-winning party as their favorite party.) Both Kinds Of PR [...] * Party-based PR asks voters to indicate their favorite political party, and then fills legislative seats in ways that improve the match between party popularity and the number of elected representatives from each party. The goal of party-based PR is to enable small ("third") parties to more easily win elections, and to defeat the tactic of gerrymandering district boundaries. * Candidate-specific PR elects multiple (two or more) candidates who, as a group, best represent the voters. Specifically each winner represents a different group of voters. For example, a two-seat version of candidate-specific PR used in an "average" district in the United States would elect one Republican and one Democrat. The goal of candidate-specific PR is to give representation to the large number of voters who are not represented when a district is represented by just one representative. Economic Prosperity Widespread economic prosperity will increase for states that adopt these recommended election-method reforms. Why will the state's prosperity increase? Currently the largest campaign contributions flow to politicians who protect tax breaks, subsidies, and legal monopolies that financially benefit the people who give these contributions. As a result, too many businesses (especially out-of-state businesses) are squeezing too much money from consumers, essential workers, employees, and (at least through IRAs) investors. When too many businesses each take a too-big slice of economic pie, not much pie remains for the employees and customers of that state’s businesses. In opposition, most voters want politicians to reduce such corruption, which undermines the state's economy. When money-based tactics have less influence on election results, politicians will dramatically shift their allegiance from the biggest campaign contributors to us, the voters. What most of us want is less corruption, wiser solutions to the problems that governments are expected to solve, and full democracy. Political Changes Initially after a state adopts the PR method recommended here, the number of elected representatives from third parties will increase. This is the intended goal of PR. Yet in response the state's Republican and Democratic parties can change their actions and platforms to win back at least some of the third-party voters. But if these reforms are not sufficient, it's likely that either a third party will grow or either the Republican or Democratic party will split. The party that suffers the biggest decline will be whichever party fails to offer candidates who voters like. This is the change that will take us to higher levels of democracy, where voters will have more influence and campaign contributors will have less influence. ....................................... The full document is at: http://www.votefair.org/proportional_representation_usa.pdf