FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132  
133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   >>  
adopted, since on the second count he would beat either of the other candidates separately by 51 votes to 49. These plain facts are indisputable. What is to be thought, then, of the claim made by Professor Nanson that Preferential Voting, with the process of elimination, is the most perfect system known for single-membered electorates. +The Block Vote.+--The Block Vote, General Ticket, or _scrutin de liste_, is in general use when there is more than one seat to be filled. Each elector has as many votes as there are members to be elected, and the highest on the list, to the number of representatives required, are successful. Dealing first with elections to a legislative body, the system is eminently unjust to parties. A rigid control of nominations is necessary in the first place, because any party which splits up its votes spoils its chance. Each party will therefore nominate only as many candidates as there are seats, and the stronger of two parties, or the strongest of a number of parties, will elect the entire list. A minority might in the latter case secure all the representation, but the practical effect of the Block Vote is to force the electors to group themselves into two parties only. It therefore has the same beneficial effect as the single electorate of confining representation to the two main parties. This is apparently nob recognized by Professor Nanson, who writes, in his pamphlet on the Hare system:--"Contrast with this the results of the Block system. With strict party voting, which has been assumed throughout, each of the five parties would put forward seven candidates. The seven seats would all be secured by Form, with 44 votes out of a total of 125, and the remaining 81, or more than two-thirds of the voters, would be wholly unrepresented." Does the Professor really think that the 81 (who, by the way, are _less_ than two-thirds) would be so foolish as not to combine and secure all the seats? The exclusion of the minority in a single-membered electorate excites only a feeling of hopelessness, but when it fails to secure a single representative in an electorate returning several members, a spirit of rankling injustice is aroused. The Block Vote has, therefore, never been tolerated for long in large electorates. In the early history of the United States many of the States adopted it, and sent to Congress a solid delegation of one party or the other. This proved so unjust, and operated so adversely t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132  
133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   >>  



Top keywords:

parties

 

system

 
single
 

candidates

 

electorate

 
secure
 

Professor

 

thirds

 

adopted

 

unjust


number

 

effect

 
members
 

representation

 
minority
 
States
 
Nanson
 

electorates

 

membered

 

results


secured

 

apparently

 
Contrast
 

voting

 

writes

 

pamphlet

 
recognized
 

strict

 

assumed

 

forward


foolish

 

tolerated

 

rankling

 

injustice

 

aroused

 

history

 

United

 
operated
 

adversely

 

proved


delegation

 

Congress

 
spirit
 
unrepresented
 

remaining

 

voters

 

wholly

 
combine
 

representative

 

returning