Allan Ides’ paper (see the previous post) includes a discussion of the pros & cons of single-member plurality elections vs proportional representation. In that discussion, Ides replies to the frequently heard objection that, under PR, a voter has no single elected representative to turn to for constituent services.
On the other hand, it is worth noting that under PR/MMD, should a constituent need to contact a representative, she will have a choice among the representatives of her region and may take some comfort in the fact that a member of her party serves as one of her representatives (if that’s the case).
It’s a good point: a single representative is replaced by a group of representatives, with the advantage that at least one, and likely more, are likely to be politically aligned with the constituent.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
