PR system more effective
Proportional representation electoral system spans a variety of electoral systems whereby the number of seats in parliament is more or less proportional to the number of votes cast. The system is used in elections mainly for devolution purposes. Single member district plurality is an electoral system which candidates run for a single seat from a geographic district. This paper compares the two electoral systems to bring out the most effective of the systems. It does so by exposing the weaknesses of a single member district plurality system and exploring the many advantages of a PR electoral system.
SMDP encourages pork barrel spending. This is a phenomenon where congressional representatives tack on pet projects in their districts to appropriation bills, ensuring the political support to their constituents. This system is widely condemned because it pressure candidates into pandering their voters to ensure they emerge victorious in the following elections. It also encourages politicians to be ambiguous about their beliefs so that they can pose to be moderate during general elections. This is because the only chance to win more votes is to appear moderate to your voters. Moreover, SMDP brings an overall dissatisfaction with the system in general. This is because the system creates a scenario where everyone loves his own representative but hates other representatives. SMDP do not allow marketplace ides to be to be expressed in public; freedom of expression is curtailed. Instead, they allow for two fairly moderate views to be expressed. This is extremely backward system because to be allowed to express only two viewpoints in a society where people have myriad alternatives is so demeaning.
In a PR system, people do not vote for someone on the basis of being represented as a district but vote for a party that best represent their needs and beliefs in its manifestoes. The PR system was developed to solve the various problems inherent in the plurality-majority voting systems. The system clearly represents the wishes of the people as shown in the ballot box. Fewer votes are wasted compared to that of SMDP, and hence encourage greater participation. Minority parties usually end up with a fairer representation in the government. The opportunities available for independent candidates are more than those for SMDP. Voters have more of a choice of candidates than that of SMDP and probably those candidates may be of better quality and represent their constituents in a professional manner. PR gets rid of “Safe” seats which have a characteristic of low turn-outs. When each vote is seen to count, people will feel more inclined to involve themselves in elections.
From the above discussion, it is evident that PR electoral system is more effective than SMDP electoral system. SMDP is a very old electoral system which has being in existent for many years. Nations are now drifting from SMDP to PR because of its myriad problems. As a rule, PR voting systems provide more accurate representation of parties , better representation for racial and political minorities, fewer wastage of votes, huge levels of voter turnout, better representation for women, little opportunity for gerrymandering, and a greater propensity for majority rule. In all, Proportional representation carries the day as the more effective electoral system of the two.
