|
Full Representation
and Proportionality in Puerto Rico
August
2003
This table shows the results of the
election for Puerto Rico's Legislative Assembly, which took place on
November 7, 2000. It also calculates differences between the
percentage of votes and the percentage of seats that the parties received.
For example, the PPD (Popular
Democratic Party) received only 46.5% of the total votes for Senate,
but they received 67.9% of the actual Senate seats, while the PNP
(New Progressive Party) received 45.3% of the votes and only
received 28.6% of the seats.
This effect is known as
disproportionality, and of course it is considered
to be unfair to parties who receive a much smaller share of the
seats than their share of the vote. Full representation systems
nearly always have less disproportionality than winner take all systems.
For example, the single
non-transferable vote
(SNTV) system used to elect 11 members
of each house is considered to be a full representation
system, at least to a large extent.
This data
clearly shows that the disproportionality is much greater in the
plurality part of the election than the SNTV part. The
percentage of SNTV votes and the percentage of SNTV seats won by
each party are always within 3% of each other, whereas the
difference between votes and seats won in the plurality
elections is much greater, ranging from 5.8% to 39.4%.
See the bold numbers in the next two
tables. % district seats - % district votes indicicates the
disproportionality of the district vote. % SNTV seats - % SNTV
votes indicates the dispropotionality of the SNTV vote (which is
always substantially lower in these elections). Higher numbers in
these rows indicate greater disproportionality.
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
District
Votes Senate |
1,778,197 |
1,850,091 |
221,411 |
3,849,699 |
|
% District
Votes Senate |
46.2% |
48.1% |
5.8% |
100.0% |
|
District
Seats Senate |
2 |
14 |
0 |
16 |
|
% District
Seats Senate |
12.5% |
87.5% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
% district
Seats - % district votes, Senate |
-33.7% |
39.4% |
-5.8% |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
District
Votes HOR |
902,708 |
934,611 |
112,592 |
1,949,911 |
|
% District Votes
HOR |
46.3% |
47.9% |
5.8% |
100.0% |
|
District Seats
HOR |
15 |
25 |
0 |
40 |
|
% District Seats
HOR |
37.5% |
62.5% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
% district Seats - % district votes,
HOR |
-8.8% |
14.6% |
-5.8% |
0.0% |
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
SNTV Votes
Senate |
856,886 |
855,013 |
217,390 |
1,929,289 |
|
% SNTV Votes
Senate |
44.4% |
44.3% |
11.3% |
100.0% |
|
SNTV Seats
Senate |
5 |
5 |
1 |
11 |
|
% SNTV Seats
Senate |
45.5% |
45.5% |
9.1% |
100.0% |
|
% SNTV Seats - % SNTV votes,
Senate |
1.0% |
1.1% |
-2.2% |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
SNTV Votes HOR |
851,506 |
857,614 |
224,765 |
1,933,885 |
|
% SNTV Votes
HOR |
44.0% |
44.3% |
11.6% |
100.0% |
|
SNTV Seats HOR |
5 |
5 |
1 |
11 |
|
% SNTV Seats
HOR |
45.5% |
45.5% |
9.1% |
100.0% |
|
% SNTV Seats - % SNTV votes,
HOR |
1.4% |
1.1% |
-2.5% |
0 |
Since the single member
districts account for so many more seats than the SNTV
elections, the overall results are high disproportional. See the
rows marked % total seats - % total votes. The Senate in
particular shows very high disproportionality.
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
Total Votes
Senate |
851,506 |
857,614 |
224,765 |
1,933,885 |
|
% Total Votes
Senate |
44.0% |
44.3% |
11.6% |
100.0% |
|
Total Seats
Senate |
8 |
19 |
1 |
28 |
|
% Total Seats
Senate |
28.6% |
67.9% |
3.6% |
100.0% |
|
% total Seats - % total votes,
Senate |
-15.5% |
23.5% |
-8.1% |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
Total Votes
HOR |
1,754,214 |
1,792,225 |
337,357 |
3,883,796 |
|
% Total Votes
HOR |
45.2% |
46.1% |
8.7% |
100.0% |
|
Total Seats
HOR |
20 |
30 |
1 |
51 |
|
% Total Seats
HOR |
39.2% |
58.8% |
2.0% |
100.0% |
|
% total Seats - % total votes,
HOR |
-6.0% |
12.7% |
-6.7% |
0.0% |
While the plurality system usually causes
results that are measurably disproportional, in some cases it
can also serve to dissuade voters from voting for smaller
parties in the first place, because they are so unlikely to win
a plurality election. The result is an outcome that appears on
the surface to be more proportional than it actually is, in that
it is less proportional to voters' true preferences (which can't
be measured if they have voted insincerely) than it is to their
actual votes.
This table provides likely evidence that
this has taken place in the single member district
elections in Puerto Rico. PIP (Puerto Rican Independence
Party), the smallest party, received over 11% of the votes
in both of the SNTV elections, but under 6% of the votes in
the both of the district elections. (See the next table.) Since
the set of voters is the same, the simplest explanation for
this is that many would-be PIP voters sensed the futility of
voting PIP in a plurality race, and voted instead for whichever
of the larger-party candidates they preferred.
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
|
% District Votes
Senate |
46.2% |
48.1% |
5.8% |
|
% SNTV Votes
Senate |
44.4% |
44.3% |
11.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
% District Votes
HOR |
46.3% |
47.9% |
5.8% |
|
% SNTV Votes
HOR |
44.0% |
44.3% |
11.6% |
Following this reasoning, the SNTV vote is
likely to be a more sincere vote than the single member district
plurality vote, and therefore in a comparison between percent of
total seats for a party and their percentage of the SNTV vote
might give us a better idea of the sincere proportionality of
this election.
Therefore, the table below could be
considered the most effective measure of the dispropotionality
in each of the two houses. (Again, higher numbers suggest
greater disproportionality between votes and seats.)
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
Total |
|
% total Seats - % SNTV votes,
Senate |
-15.8% |
23.5% |
-7.7% |
0.0% |
|
% total Seats - % SNTV votes,
HOR |
-4.8% |
14.5% |
-9.7% |
0.0% |
This is our interpretation of the 2000
Legislative Assembly election, in terms of proportionality and
disproportionality. For the sake of reference, here is the
complete table, which the other tables are drawn from. Note that
the percentages are slightly different in the full table,
because they take into account the null vote, the small number
of independent candidates, etc.
|
Party |
PNP |
PPD |
PIP |
EXTRA |
Others |
Target |
Null |
Total |
|
District Votes
Senate |
1,778,197 |
1,850,091 |
221,411 |
|
676 |
14,162 |
4,800 |
3,869,337 |
|
% District Votes
Senate |
46.0% |
47.8% |
5.7% |
|
0.0% |
0.4% |
0.1% |
100.0% |
|
District seats
Senate |
2 |
14 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
|
% District seats
Senate |
12.5% |
87.5% |
0.0% |
|
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
SNTV Votes Senate |
856,886 |
855,013 |
217,390 |
|
142 |
14,162 |
4,800 |
1,948,393 |
|
% SNTV Votes
Senate |
44.0% |
43.9% |
11.2% |
|
0.0% |
0.7% |
0.2% |
100.0% |
|
SNTV seats Senate |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
|
% SNTV seats
Senate |
45.5% |
45.5% |
9.1% |
|
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
Total Votes Senate |
2,635,083 |
2,705,104 |
438,801 |
|
818 |
28,324 |
9,600 |
5,817,730 |
|
% Total Votes
Senate |
45.3% |
46.5% |
7.5% |
|
0.0% |
0.5% |
0.2% |
100.0% |
|
Additional seats
Senate |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
Total seats Senate |
8 |
19 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
28 |
|
% Total seats
Senate |
28.6% |
67.9% |
3.6% |
|
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% district seats - % district votes,
Senate |
-33.5% |
39.7% |
-5.7% |
|
0.0% |
-0.4% |
-0.1% |
0.0% |
|
% SNTV seats - % SNTV votes,
Senate |
1.5% |
1.6% |
-2.1% |
|
0.0% |
-0.7% |
-0.2% |
0.0% |
|
% total seats - % total votes,
Senate |
-16.7% |
21.4% |
-4.0% |
|
0.0% |
-0.5% |
-0.2% |
0.0% |
|
% total seats - % SNTV votes,
Senate |
-15.4% |
24.0% |
-7.6% |
|
0.0% |
-0.7% |
-0.2% |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
District Votes HOR |
902,708 |
934,611 |
112,592 |
262 |
1,152 |
14,162 |
4,800 |
1,970,287 |
|
% District Votes
HOR |
45.8% |
47.4% |
5.7% |
0.0% |
0.1% |
0.7% |
0.2% |
100.0% |
|
District seats HOR |
15 |
25 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
40 |
|
% District seats
HOR |
37.5% |
62.5% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
SNTV Votes HOR |
851,506 |
857,614 |
224,765 |
0 |
274 |
14,162 |
4,800 |
1,953,121 |
|
% SNTV Votes HOR |
43.6% |
43.9% |
11.5% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.7% |
0.2% |
100.0% |
|
SNTV seats HOR |
5 |
5 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
|
% SNTV seats HOR |
45.5% |
45.5% |
9.1% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
Total Votes HOR |
1,754,214 |
1,792,225 |
337,357 |
262 |
1,426 |
28,324 |
9,600 |
3,923,408 |
|
% Total Votes HOR |
44.7% |
45.7% |
8.6% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.7% |
0.2% |
100.0% |
|
Total seats HOR |
20 |
30 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
51 |
|
% Total seats HOR |
39.2% |
58.8% |
2.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% district seats - % district votes,
HOR |
-8.3% |
15.1% |
-5.7% |
0.0% |
-0.1% |
-0.7% |
-0.2% |
0.0% |
|
% SNTV seats - % SNTV votes,
HOR |
1.9% |
1.5% |
-2.4% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
-0.7% |
-0.2% |
0 |
|
% total seats - % total votes,
HOR |
-5.5% |
13.1% |
-6.6% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
-0.7% |
-0.2% |
0.0% |
|
% total seats - % SNTV votes,
HOR |
-4.4% |
14.9% |
-9.5% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
-0.7% |
-0.2% |
0 |
______________
Researched and created by James
Green-Armytage, as associate of the Center for Voting and Democracy,
in August 2003.
Source:
http://electionspuertorico.org/2000/cuadros.html
Elections in Puerto Rico: "Resumen Estad��stico
de las Elecciones Generales del 7 de noviembre de 2000."
|
