Comparison With The Droop Quota
The Droop quota is smaller than the Hare quota, and is more efficient when counting ballots since a candidate needs only the smaller quota to be elected. Overall the two quotas give somewhat similar results since a candidate is bound to be elected once they achieve the Droop quota, however the results often differ, particularly with regard to the allocation of the last seat, based on the transfer of preferences. In the above example, using the Droop quota, Carter would be allocated the second seat in preference to Brad, by 40 votes to 26.
- In a multi-winner election, the Hare quota is kinder to small parties than the Droop quota because they have a slightly better chance to win the final seat.
- In an open list multi-winner election under the Hare quota it is possible for a party supported by a clear majority of voters to receive only a minority of seats if the votes are not dispersed relatively evenly across all the party's candidates. Thus the principle of majority rule favours the Droop quota
- In an STV election in which there is only one seat to be filled (in other words an Instant Run-off Voting election) the Hare quota is inapplicable, as the quota would be 100% of the votes cast.
The difference between the two quotas comes down to what the quota implies. Winners elected under a Hare system represent that proportion of the electorate; winners under a Droop system were elected by that proportion of the electorate.
The Droop quota is today the most frequently used quota for STV elections.
|
Read more about this topic: Hare Quota
Famous quotes containing the words comparison with the, comparison with, comparison, droop and/or quota:
“From top to bottom of the ladder, greed is aroused without knowing where to find ultimate foothold. Nothing can calm it, since its goal is far beyond all it can attain. Reality seems valueless by comparison with the dreams of fevered imaginations; reality is therefore abandoned.”
—Emile Durkheim (1858–1917)
“Certainly there is not the fight recorded in Concord history, at least, if in the history of America, that will bear a moment’s comparison with this, whether for the numbers engaged in it, or for the patriotism and heroism displayed.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“The comparison between Coleridge and Johnson is obvious in so far as each held sway chiefly by the power of his tongue. The difference between their methods is so marked that it is tempting, but also unnecessary, to judge one to be inferior to the other. Johnson was robust, combative, and concrete; Coleridge was the opposite. The contrast was perhaps in his mind when he said of Johnson: “his bow-wow manner must have had a good deal to do with the effect produced.””
—Virginia Woolf (1882–1941)
“And by another year,
Such as God knows, with freer air,
More fruits and fairer flowers
Will bear,
While I droop here.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“Some are petitioning the State to dissolve the Union, to disregard the requisitions of the President. Why do they not dissolve it themselves,—the union between themselves and the State,—and refuse to pay their quota into its treasury? Do not they stand in the same relation to the State that the State does to the Union? And have not the same reasons prevented the State from resisting the Union which have prevented them from resisting the State?”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)