首页> 外文OA文献 >When Is a Gerrymander Not a Gerrymander:Who Benefits and Who Loses from the Changed Rules for Defining Parliamentary Constituencies?
【2h】

When Is a Gerrymander Not a Gerrymander:Who Benefits and Who Loses from the Changed Rules for Defining Parliamentary Constituencies?

机译:什么时候是礼貌的人:谁改变了定义国会选区的规则,谁能受益,谁能输?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Members of the British Labour party have, not for the first time, criticised the Boundary Commissions’ proposals for new constituency boundaries as gerrymandering. This represents a misuse of the term: the Commissions have produced recommended constituencies in the context of new rules for such redistributions that give precedence to equality of electorates across all seats and the boundaries of those constituencies have been defined without any reference to the likely electoral consequences. The Conservatives, who were responsible for the change in the rules to emphasise electoral equality, wanted to remove a decades-long Labour advantage in the translation of votes into seats because of variations in constituency size, and the Commissions’ implementation of those rules has achieved that. A Labour advantage has been removed but not replaced by a Conservative advantage: in terms of electoral equality between the two, the playing field has been levelled. Labour's claim to have been disadvantaged by decisions on the electoral register is also examined; the disadvantage is probably only small.
机译:英国工党成员没有第一次批评边界委员会关于新选区边界的提议,认为这是行礼。这表示对该术语的误用:委员会在此类重新分配的新规则的背景下产生了推荐的选区,这些新选区优先考虑了所有席位的选民平等,并且定义了这些选区的界限而未提及可能的选举后果。保守党负责改变规则以强调选举平等,但由于选区规模的差异,他们希望在将选票转换成席位的过程中取消长达数十年的工党优势,而委员会已实施了这些规则那。劳动优势已被取消,但并未被保守优势所取代:就两者之间的选举平等而言,竞争环境已趋于平坦。还对工党声称因选举名册上的决定而处于不利地位的说法进行了审查;缺点可能只是很小。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号