Misplaced Pages

#412587

36-735: It was established by the centre-fraction in Sąjūdis in 1990 as the Lithuanian Centre Movement . In 1992 parliamentary election the movement failed to pass 4 per cent threshold and won only 2 seats. In 1993 the movement was reorganised to party. In 1995 municipal elections the party entered many municipal councils and joined coalition with the Homeland Union and the Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party . In 1996 parliamentary election

72-534: A candidate who has been declared elected. In proportional quota-based systems such as STV or expanding approvals , these excess votes can be transferred to other candidates, preventing them from being wasted . The Droop quota was first suggested by the English lawyer and mathematician Henry Richmond Droop (1831–1884) as an alternative to the Hare quota , which is a basic component of single transferable voting ,

108-527: A coalition government with the LDDP. Polling procedures were witnessed by international observers. The LDDP won 73 seats, with analysts attributing their victory to the party's support from farmers and the Russian and Polish minorities, as well as popular anger about the economic crisis, in particular the fuel shortages since Russia (the main supplier) had cut off imports. The results showed widespread desire for

144-480: A different political direction and dissatisfaction with the confrontational approach to politics used by Sąjūdis. The elections were even more disappointing for centrist political groups, which only received around 15% of the vote, despite many prominent individuals in their ranks. The decisive outcome of the elections surprised observers and even the LDDP, who had expected to win 15–17 seats and did not have enough names on their electoral list (on their nationwide list

180-759: A form of proportional representation . Today, the Droop quota is used in almost all STV elections, including those in Australia , the Republic of Ireland , Northern Ireland , and Malta . It is also used in South Africa to allocate seats by the largest remainder method . The Droop quota for a k {\displaystyle k} -winner election is given by the expression: total votes k + 1 {\displaystyle {\frac {\text{total votes}}{k+1}}} Sometimes,

216-546: A replacement for the Hare quota (votes/seats). Their quota was meant to produce more proportional result by having the quota as low as thought to be possible. Their quota was basically votes/seats plus 1, plus 1, the formula on the left on the first row. This formula may yield a fraction, which was a problem as early STV systems did not use fractions. Droop went to votes/seats plus 1, plus 1, rounded down (the variant on top right). Hagenbach-Bischoff went to votes/seats +1, rounded up,

252-557: A slowdown in the pace of change to a free-market system and improved relations with Russia. In the run-up to the elections, Sąjūdis portrayed the opposing political groups as communist and reactionary, opposed to independence and democracy. The LDDP proclaimed their political principles, including the foreign policy aims of membership of the Council of Europe , association agreement with the European Community , agreements with

288-467: Is 100, and there are 3 seats. The Droop quota is therefore 100 3 + 1 = 25 {\textstyle {\frac {100}{3+1}}=25} . These votes are as follows: First preferences for each candidate are tallied: Only Washington has strictly more than 25 votes. As a result, he is immediately elected. Washington has 20 excess votes that can be transferred to their second choice, Hamilton. The tallies therefore become: Hamilton

324-439: Is elected, so his excess votes are redistributed. Thanks to Hamilton's support, Jefferson receives 30 votes to Burr's 20 and is elected. If all of Hamilton's supporters had instead backed Burr, the election for the last seat would have been exactly tied, requiring a tiebreaker; generally, ties are broken by taking the limit of the results as the quota approaches the exact Droop quota. There are at least six different versions of

360-543: The Democratic Labour Party of Lithuania (LDDP), which won 73 seats. Analysts attributed the surprisingly decisive victory to support from farmers and the Russian and Polish minorities, as well as widespread dissatisfaction with the economic situation and the policies of the ruling Sąjūdis political movement, which only won 30 seats. LDDP leader Algirdas Brazauskas was subsequently elected the Speaker of

396-552: The International Monetary Fund and neighborly relations with Poland. They also called for agreements with Russia to secure traditional sources for materials and trade. Altogether 26 parties and political movements contested the elections, with 486 candidates contesting the single-seat constituencies. Opinion polls suggested that no political group would win a decisive majority and a coalition government seemed likely. Most participating parties ruled out joining

SECTION 10

#1732798171413

432-698: The Modern Christian-Democratic Union (known as the New Politics Coalition). In 2000 parliamentary election the party won 2.86 per cent of the votes and 2 seats. Coalition as a whole failed to win majority of the seats in Seimas and relied from the support of Lithuanian Peasants Party and Young Lithuania . Coalition lasted only 8 months. In 2003 the party joined forces with the Liberal Union of Lithuania and

468-607: The Seimas Palace was located. The main challenger to the ruling Sąjūdis nationalist movement, led by outgoing Chairman of the Supreme Council of Lithuania Vytautas Landsbergis , was the LDDP headed by Brazauskas. Sąjūdis – which had controlled the Supreme Council since February 1990 and spearheaded the move to independence – was criticized for the country's economic woes, while their opponents called for

504-804: The Sixth Seimas and assumed the title of acting President. Bronislovas Lubys was appointed Prime Minister . The elections were the first in Europe following the fall of the Iron Curtain in which a former communist party received the most votes and returned to government. They were also the only ones to date in which a single party won an absolute majority in the Seimas. The LDDP received the highest vote share of any party in free and fair elections in Lithuania since 1920 . The elections were held under

540-405: The Supreme Council ; 70 were elected using proportional representation and 71 from single-member constituencies. Where no candidate in the single-member constituecies received more than 50% of the vote on 25 October, a run-off was held on 15 November. The first round of the elections were held simultaneously with a referendum on the adoption of a new constitution . The result was a victory for

576-403: The 50% bar in single-winner elections. Just as any candidate with more than half of all votes is guaranteed to be declared the winner in single-seat election, any candidate who holds more than a Droop quota's worth of votes is guaranteed to win a seat in a multiwinner election . Besides establishing winners, the Droop quota is used to define the number of excess votes , i.e. votes not needed by

612-757: The Droop quota is written as a share of all votes, in which case it has value 1 ⁄ k +1 . A candidate who, at any point, holds more than one Droop quota's worth of votes is therefore guaranteed to win a seat. Modern variants of STV use fractional transfers of ballots to eliminate uncertainty. However, STV elections with whole vote reassignment cannot handle fractional quotas, and so instead will round up or round down . For example: ⌈ total votes k + 1 ⌉ {\displaystyle \left\lceil {\frac {\text{total votes}}{k+1}}\right\rceil } The Droop quota can be derived by considering what would happen if k candidates (who we call "Droop winners") have achieved

648-1661: The Droop quota to appear in various legal codes or definitions of the quota, all varying by one vote . Some claim that, depending on which version is used, a failure of proportionality in small elections may arise. Common variants include: Historical: ⌊ votes seats + 1 + 1 ⌋ ⌈ votes seats + 1 ⌉ ⌊ votes seats + 1 + 1 ⌋ Accidental: ⌊ votes + 1 seats + 1 ⌋ Unusual: ⌊ votes seats + 1 ⌋ ⌊ votes seats + 1 + 1 2 ⌋ {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rlrl}{\text{Historical:}}&&{\phantom {\Bigl \lfloor }}{\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}+1{\phantom {\Bigr \rfloor }}&&\left\lceil {\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}\right\rceil &&{\Bigl \lfloor }{\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}+1{\Bigr \rfloor }\\{\text{Accidental:}}&&{\phantom {\Bigl \lfloor }}{\frac {{\text{votes}}+1}{{\text{seats}}+1}}{\phantom {\Bigr \rfloor }}\\{\text{Unusual:}}&&\left\lfloor {\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}\right\rfloor &&\left\lfloor {\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}+{\frac {1}{2}}\right\rfloor \end{array}}} Droop and Hagenbach-Bischoff derived new quota as

684-402: The Droop quota. However, some jurisdictions fail to correctly specify this in their election administration laws. The Droop quota is often confused with the Hare quota . While the Droop quota gives the number of voters needed to mathematically guarantee a candidate's election, the Hare quota gives the number of voters represented by each winner by exactly linear proportionality. As a result,

720-447: The Droop quota. The goal is to identify whether an outside candidate could defeat any of these candidates. In this situation, if each quota winner's share of the vote equals 1 ⁄ k +1 plus 1, while all unelected candidates' share of the vote, taken together, would be less than 1 ⁄ k +1 votes. Thus, even if there were only one unelected candidate who held all the remaining votes, they would not be able to defeat any of

756-431: The Droop winners. Newland and Britton noted that while a tie for the last seat is possible, such a situation can occur no matter which quota is used. The following election has 3 seats to be filled by single transferable vote . There are 4 candidates: George Washington , Alexander Hamilton , Thomas Jefferson , and Aaron Burr . There are 102 voters, but two of the votes are spoiled . The total number of valid votes

SECTION 20

#1732798171413

792-437: The Hare quota is said to give somewhat more proportional outcomes, by promoting representation of smaller parties, although sometimes under Hare a majority group will be denied the majority of seats, thus denying the principle of majority rule in such settings as a city council elected at-large. By contrast, the Droop quota is more biased towards large parties than any other admissible quota . The Droop quota sometimes allows

828-534: The LDDP's parliamentary majority decreased to one. By April 1993 the LDDP tally had increased by three seats as the Supreme Court of Lithuania annulled Central Electoral Commission decisions that recognised victories in run-offs to candidates who had received fewer votes than the LDDP candidates. The party also won back Kaišiadorys constituency in a by-election. On 1 December 1992 Bronislovas Lubys , an independent business manager and politician supported by

864-404: The LDDP, was appointed Prime Minister . Hagenbach-Bischoff quota Condorcet methods Positional voting Cardinal voting Quota-remainder methods Approval-based committees Fractional social choice Semi-proportional representation By ballot type Pathological response Strategic voting Paradoxes of majority rule Positive results In

900-611: The Modern Christian-Democratic Union to form the Liberal and Centre Union . This article about a Lithuanian political party is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . 1992 Lithuanian parliamentary election Parliamentary elections were held in Lithuania in two stages on 25 October and 15 November 1992. A total of 141 members were elected to the Seimas , which replaced

936-487: The interests of their parties. Suffrage was granted based on citizenship of the former Soviet Union (with exceptions) as opposed to being based solely on the citizenship law of the pre-war Republic of Lithuania (similarly as happened in Latvia and Estonia in early 1990s). The elections were the first in which voters abroad could vote by post . These voters' votes were assigned to the 1st ( Naujamiestis ) constituency, where

972-588: The nationwide constituency did not apply to electoral lists representing national minorities, for whom it was reduced to 1.4%. Allocation of seats in single nationwide constituency was conducted using the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota . The mixed electoral system was a compromise between the two main political powers, the Sąjūdis coalition, which preferred first-past-the-post , and the ex-communist LDDP, which had proposed proportional representation . The latter

1008-530: The party had put only 71 members). Sąjūdis reacted to their loss with disbelief and encouraged supporters to join acts of civil disobedience . The elections also caused dissent in Sąjūdis' membership and led to the formation of a formal political party, the Homeland Union , in 1993. The first session of the newly elected Sixth Seimas took place on 25 November 1992, having originally been planned for 18 November, but recounts in some single-member constituencies and disputes over possible voting irregularities caused

1044-746: The party won 8.67 per cent of the votes and 14 seats. It signed agreement of confidence and supply with the Homeland Union and the Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party. in 1997 presidential election the Centre Union supported Valdas Adamkus , who won election. In spring of 2000, the Centre Union joined informal alliance between the New Union (Social Liberals) , the Liberal Union of Lithuania and

1080-402: The session to be delayed. In the first session of the Seimas, Brazauskas was elected Speaker and assumed the title of acting President. Brazauskas would go on to be elected President on 14 February 1993 in the country's first presidential elections . After Brazauskas was elected president (and due to Speaker Česlovas Juršėnas having to suspend his membership of the LDDP parliamentary group),

1116-522: The study of electoral systems , the Droop quota (sometimes called the Hagenbach-Bischoff , Britton , or Newland-Britton quota ) is the minimum number of supporters a party or candidate needs to receive in a district to guarantee they will win at least one seat in a legislature . The Droop quota is used to extend the concept of a majority to multiwinner elections , taking the place of

Lithuanian Centre Union - Misplaced Pages Continue

1152-405: The terms of the new electoral law, which had been adopted on 9 July 1992; on the same day, the election date was set for 25 October. The law provided for a mixed electoral system, with 70 MPs elected by closed list proportional representation in a single nationwide constituency with a 4% electoral threshold, and 71 MPs in single member constituencies using the two-round system . The 4% threshold in

1188-404: The third row), it is possible for one more candidate to reach the quota than there are seats to fill. However, as Newland and Britton noted in 1974, this is not a problem: if the last two winners both receive a Droop quota of votes, it would mean a tie. Rules are in place to break a tie, and ties can occur regardless of which quota is used. Spoiled ballots should not be included when calculating

1224-452: The use of fractions in fractional STV systems, now common today. As well, it is un-necessary to ensure the quota is larger than vote/seats plus 1, as in the historical examples, the variant on the second row, and the formula on the right on the bottom row. When using the exact Droop quota (votes/seats plus 1) or any variant where the quota is slightly less than votes/seats plus 1, such as in votes/seats plus 1, rounded down (the left variant on

1260-460: The variant in the middle of the top row. Hagenbach-Bischoff proposed a quota that is "the whole number next greater than the quotient obtained by dividing m V {\displaystyle mV} , the number of votes, by n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} " (where n is the number of seats). Some hold the misconception that these rounded-off variants of the Droop and Hagenbach-Bischoff quota are still needed, despite

1296-461: Was confident of the appeal its political stance had with voters but lacked popular personalities, while Sąjūdis was concerned about its falling approval ratings but counted among its members many of the individuals that had led Lithuania to independence from the Soviet Union . The mixed system was also expected to strike a balance between MPs representing the interests of their constituencies and

#412587