Ams - Advantages / Disadvantages Essay

The election system that we currently have in the UK is a lot like marmite, you either love it or you hate it… There are many different arguments for and against this system, however people forget that within getting rid of the First Past the Post system, you will then need to then replace it. This then poses the vital question of which is the best fitting system and should we really change tradition?

Proportionality is a key factor in assessing the fairness of a voting system, if a parties number of votes is not equal or close to their number of seats in parliament then the voters’ are being misrepresented. AMS is a PR system, which results in a party’s

One can come to a conclusion that plurality systems have a major flaw and that is inequality. Adopting a MMP would be a huge step forward in Canadian democracy. With a MMP system in place, more women would be elected to the legislature because it creates fairness. With more women in the legislature, it can make a substantial difference in the types of laws that may be proposed and passed. Another advantage MMP brings to Canada is instead of electing one member of the legislature in each small district, Canada would use larger districts to elect several members. To add to this advantage, the candidates that win the seats in these multi-member districts are determined by the proportion of votes each party receives. With Canada’s current electoral system, one citizen’s vote counts for less than another citizen’s vote. By changing to a MMP system, Canada can give more equality and fairness back to the citizens.

SMP voting is often seen as easy for the voter to use because you only have to mark X on the paper ballot beside the candidate you choose with a pencil and then at the end of election day all the X are counted to determine the winner. The results are usually known within a few hours of the polls closing and the public knows which party is forming the new government by the end of the night. (Wilson 4) this results in a better chance at a strong majority government being elected. Those in favour of SMP argue that majority governments are needed because they create

The second reason why FPTP should not be used for elections to the House of Commons is that it is not representative, meaning that the percentage share of votes is not proportional to the percentage share of seats, because of single member constituencies. This is a weakness as it means that there is not a fair level of representation within the House of Commons, which makes the system less democratic as not everybody’s views are entirely represented in Parliament. For example, in the 2010 general elections, the Conservative party won 36% of votes, but a staggering 47.1% of seats, whilst UKIP gained 3.1% of votes, but 0% of seats, indicating the tendency of FPTP to radically distort the relationship between votes and seats. Due to the fact that FPTP is a plurality system, rather than a majoritarian one, MPs can win the seat by as little as 1 vote, meaning that

There is a number of systems that use PR such as the Single Transferable Vote (STV) (the Regional and National Lists) and the Alternative Vote. There is a third system that combines these two, known as the Additional Member System (AMS) or the hybrid or top-up system. The AMS system is presently used in elections for the Scottish Parliament, where voters can vote for single candidates in their constituencies but also for candidates from regional 'lists' put forward by each party. If there is a discrepancy between the percentage of seats the party has won and the percentage of votes cast, the seats are 'topped up' from the

FPTP usually provides a majority government this means parliament can put bills through easier. For example in 1997 and 2001 labour received most votes with landslide victories. Whereas using an AMS system you would usually get a coalition or an minority government. For example a majority SNP government was in place in 2007. This means that manifesto pledges couldn’t be made because the SNP would need support from other parties this shows that FPTP makes passing bills easier.

Furthermore, Additional Member system leads to different outcomes as it’s a proportional system which means the proportion of seats won by the candidates and the votes they received are proportional. For example in Scotland in 2007 the SNP received 31% of the votes and won 47 seats and Labour won 29.2% of the votes and won 46 seats. This means that often political parties are rewarded with a fair share of the seats for the votes they obtained, also in AMS the outcome is made more proportional by its constituency list top up, thus making it easier for third party candidates to make a inroad into politics. Thus AMS produces different outcomes to other electoral systems due its hybrid nature, where it combines F-P-T-P voting system with closed list system.

Dellis argues that this Plurality voting procedure is simply a way to waste a citizens vote and I completely agree because these voters are not sharing an interest with a major candidate leading them to either not vote or vote because they really have no choice. When a candidate does not have a chance or has it really difficult to be placed in a ballot, it limits them to show the kind of work they are up for or what their party platform may look like. These are the barriers that need to be knocked down in order for the government to be

The national shortage of Registered Nurses (RNs) has helped generate formidable interest in the nursing profession among people entering the workforce and those pursuing a career change. According to a report issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service in 2002, the national population is continuing to grow and age and medical services continue to advance, so the need for nurses will continue to increase. They report from 2000 to 2020 the predicted shortage of nurses is expected to grow to 29 percent, compared to a 6 percent shortage in 2000. With the projected supply, demand, and shortage of registered nurses and nursing salaries ever-increasing, the nursing profession can offer countless opportunities. But first one must

Basically, voters select one candidate from their riding, just like in an SMP system, but they also place a vote for which party they would like to form the government. This second vote determines the amount of seats that each party gains proportional to the amount of votes they collected in the countries. The representatives from each party are then made up of the elected representatives from each riding (if that party was able to elect any) and other members selected by the leader1. An STV system, which is what the Citizen’s Assembly recommended to the people of BC, can be found in Ireland, Malta, and in some levels of government in Australia. Voters rank candidates according to their priorities, choosing as many as they wish. For example, a certain voter could select a Conservative as his or her first choice, a Liberal as the second, a New Democrat as third, and then cast no votes for the Green Party. When each a candidate reaches a certain quota of first place votes, they are elected, and the extra first place votes that they did not need are distributed to the other parties according to their overall ranking. If a second candidate is then elected, his or her extra votes are then distributed to the remaining parties, and so on . This system is rather complicated, especially when compared to our current system, but computerized voting systems have generally alleviated any problems.

Canadian electoral system is largely based on the single member plurality (SMP) system which was inherited from its former British colonial masters. The system dates back to several years before the formation of the Canadian confederation. Some of the common features of the Canadian electoral system include election candidates to represent designated geographical areas popularly known as” ridings”, counting and tallying of the votes casted on the basis of the districts as opposed to the parties of the candidates (Dyck, 622). Finally, a candidate only needs a simple majority over the other candidates in order to be considered a winner, even if the winner has a small percentage of votes. This system has however been heavily criticized for its winner takes all way of judging victory. Critics argue that if the winner takes over the whole system, it may result into unfair representation of the various social groups, but it may also bring into power unstable minority participation in government. For example, a candidate can win even with barely 25% of all the votes casted, while the small parties may end up with no seats in the parliament.

A transition to MMP at the federal level will result in marked improvement in a number of functional electoral areas. The first of which that will be addressed is that of greater voter turnout at elections. The majority of research conducted on electoral systems and voter turnout has supported the notion that voter turnout is greater in countries that have some form of proportional representation (PR) over countries with plurality or majoritarian electoral systems (Karp and Banducci 311). The average increase in voter turnout in countries with PR, as found across a number

The Single Transferable Vote system is a system that was invented by a mathematician whose processes are lengthy and confusing to the people who actually use it to implement change: voters. The currently used Single Member Plurality system is widely understood and the best system for Manitoban voters. While some may argue that the Single Transferrable Vote system is a superior method of electing members of government in Manitoba, due to the unfamiliarity with candidates, lack of voter involvement, and confusing nature of the system, the current Single Member Plurality system is more effective and reflective of the actual views of the electors.

The Additional Member system is able to combine both First Past The Post and Proportional representation. A proportion of sets is awarded through FPTP, while the rest are awarded on a regional list system. The electorate is able to vote for a constituency candidate, and a party as well. Therefore some of the elected representatives have a constituency to look after, whilst other do not. The rest are allocated on a proportional basis. AMS is used in the UK for the elections for the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the London Assembly. The main advantages to this system is that there is a fair degree of proportionality to the votes cast and that voters can vote for both candidates and parties.