Proportional representation solves several serious problems. Gerrymandering, artificial polarization, false majorities; I can't imagine a #ProRep system worse than these.

But it's not necessarily perfect.

How can #ProRep go wrong, and how can we fix it? A thread: 1/

First: I can't overemphasize the disclaimer. Single-seat choose-one (FPTP) is really really bad. Even the worst problems with #ProRep are smaller and easier to fix. This is about how to get the best #ProRep method, not reasons to avoid a switch. 2/

Start with a list. I'll explain each below.

Basic problem / best fix

Party fragmentation / thresholds *AND TRANSFERS*
Wasted votes / transfers
Clone parties / no duplicate voting power
Low voter accountability / biproportionality (districts)
Complex ballots / delegation

As I've said, each of these problems is fixable.

No system currently in use includes all the fixes. If you want your country to adopt a new #ProRep method, you shouldn't just copy your method from somewhere else; use something new, such as PLACE or modified-Bavarian.

Problem 1: party fragmentation. Example: Israel, especially before thresholds rose.

A main goal of #ProRep is to allow more than 2 parties. But that doesn't mean more parties is always better. Past a certain point, you just get 1-issue parties, no broad vision; short-sighted.

For instance, in Israel, narrowly-focused religious parties, though a minority, have managed to make it so ordinary people often have to go abroad to get married. If more coalition-building happened explicitly within-party, before elections, I don't think that could happen.

How good #ProRep methods can fix this fragmentation: thresholds.

This is obvious; indeed in Israel, thresholds have risen over time. But note, this doesn't have to be party-level. Individual-level thresholds w/in local districts also possible; can be higher with < distortion.

Furthermore, if done badly, thresholds lead directly to...

Problem 2: Wasted votes. Eg: Poland 2015. Nearly 17% of votes went to sub-threshold parties and elected nobody; thus Law and Justice got 51% seats on 38% votes.

Solution: don't throw sub-threshold votes away, transfer.

The prototypical example of a voting method that does transfers is STV. When a candidate is eliminated, their votes transfer to their voters' next preference. And that's good. But it also leads to the next problem: ((not same order as above))

Problem 3: complex ballots. Example: STV ballots which require voters to mark a full preference order over candidates.

Solution: delegation. Candidates pre-register preference orders; votes follow the order of their top-choice candidate.

Now, this is prob'ly the most controversial thing I've said so far. Some #ProRep activists don't like delegation; it shifts some power from voters (especially highly-engaged ones) to politicians.

But I think tradeoff is worth it. The simpler ballots it allows are only the start.

Delegation has advantages beyond just simpler ballots. For one, it can also allow unified #ProRep elections over much larger areas than the 5-seat districts that are practical under STV. That means broader effective choices for the voter, not narrower.

For another, delegation expands the idea of representative government to inside the elections themselves. A group has more power by unifying behind a candidate; even if that cand loses, other reps must respect them as they negotiate for higher preferences.

Problem 4: clone parties. This problem only happens under a specific kind of #ProRep method: mixed-member methods with dual ballots, such as Wales. These methods "forget" which voters get extra voting power on each half of their ballot, if halves are for different parties.

This leads to strategic voting; at the extreme, larger parties all have 2 versions, one for each half of the ballot.

This issue is a bit technical, but there are solutions. For instance, the Bavarian MMP method reduces the problem, and with STV-like mods, could do so even more.

Problem 5: lower voter accountability. Politics may become more party-centric; less freedom of conscience for individual reps.

Political scientists disagree on whether this is a bad thing or a good one. But if you want a more-direct chain of accountability in #ProRep, you can...

use "biproportional" methods, which still elect most or all representatives from specific geographic constituencies, thus maintaining local/concentrated accountability to voters.

So there you have it: 5 possible problems, but all of them are solvable.

No currently-used methods include all 5 solutions, but it's definitely possible to design methods that do. Examples include PLACE voting ( https://electowiki.org/wiki/PLACE_FAQ ) or modified-Bavarian.

End thread.