Who represents us best? One member or many?

Abstract

Most of the debate about electoral systems focuses on the merits of proportionality versus majoritarianism. But there is another important issue at stake. Are single member or multi-member districts the more likely to encourage elected representatives to act as intermediaries on behalf of citizens in their dealings with the state? We use data collected by the comparative study of electoral systems project to assess whether there is a systematic difference between single member and multi-member systems in the amount of contact between elected representatives and voters and whether such contact helps promote greater satisfaction with democracy. Although single member districts appear to encourage greater contact than do multi-member systems in general, there is no difference between single member districts and those multi-member systems that allow voters to express a candidate preference. Meanwhile those living in countries with single member districts are no more satisfied with democracy than are those living in countries with multi-member ones.