Talk:Playmander

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 Playmander is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.
Assessment comments

[edit] Image

I added the 2006 image because incidentally its almost identical to what the vote looked like in 1965—except with less districts. The 1993 one is wasted. michael talk 00:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

But doesnt the 1993 image also assist in demonstrating the core Labor areas, and that Adelaide isn't a bunch of automatic Labor voters? Timeshift (talk) 10:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 1975?

According to this page, Dunstan introduced one vote one value form in 1975 because he won on 49.2% of the 2pp vote... however in the 1975 election, Labor got 53.4% on the 2pp... Timeshift 14:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[1] You're looking at the 1977 results. michael talk 23:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why does the article seem to wash LCL hands?

http://elections.uwa.edu.au/ indicates One, two and three member districts when the LCL took government in 1933, with the next election in 1938 showing Single member districts. This article sorely misses the crucial spot which is, how did this occur? Reading gerrymander, how does the 'Playmander' not equate to a gerrymander? Do one of the references clearly state it was not a gerrymander, and what was missing from it that made it not a gerrymander? As it stands I feel the article as at the least, not informing who caused it to occur, at the most is covering up actions by Butler/LCL. Timeshift (talk) 10:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It technically wasn't a gerrymander: a gerrymander is where the districts are redistributed to favour one particular party, whereas what this was electoral malapportionment: electorates of actual different sizes. It probably warrants more discussion of the LCL's role in it, though, as long as sources for that can be found. Rebecca (talk) 10:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
To selectively quote from a PDF titled "Under-Representation and the ‘Gerrymander’ in the Playford Era" by Jaensch: The term ‘gerrymander’ was used by opponents of the LCL throughout the period of the Playford era, 1938-1965, to criticize its electoral basis, and it can be shown that this criticism, if not completely valid, has some substance. To Key, narrowly defined, the term gerrymander refers to the deliberate formation of legislative districts in such a way as to gain partisan advantage in the composition of the representative body. Such ‘deliberate formation’ undoubtedly occurred in South Australia in the Playford era.
Another quote: The South Australian electoral system was, in this period, clearly biassed in favour of the LCL, and part of this bias, that due to the differences in electorate size, was deliberate.
Another: The LCL gained the government benches in seven elections under the system of compulsory voting (CV came in '44), and in six of these gained a minority of votes on a ‘two-party’ contest basis. (what the hell?)
And ends with: A report to a conference of political theorists in 1965 stated: "... the only legitimate basis of representation... is people. One man’s vote must be worth the same as another’s. That is not a call for mathematical nicety. It is a statement of the fundamental principle upon which any proper system of legislative appointment must be constructed.", and on this principle is the South Australian electoral system in the Playford era indicted. - Dean Jaensch.
I have emailed the source to both your wikipedia email addresses. Timeshift (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I've challenged the entire sentence. Jaensch says 2:1 came in in 1936, and the UWA elections link shows that up until that point there were most often not 46 seats in the lower (correction, 46 seats was used 1915-33 inclusive). It writes like the cause of the Playmander was the SA constitution. Timeshift (talk) 05:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have read neither the present SA constiution nor the one drawn by our founding fathers, but I do know one thing: it is alterable by simple majority vote. So what was in the constitution then is not in it today, which may explain some curiosities in the article. I am without internet at home at the moment (in a library... *sigh*) but will be hapyp to take a deeper look when I get a chance in a few days. Hope nothing rash happens until then! Kind regards, Michael talk 05:06, 8 June 2008 (UTC)