MPR – voteguy.com

Trojan Horse or distraction?

June 2, 2026

At the Election Law Blog, Rick Pildes describes two rationales for adopting proportional representation (PR) nationally. One of these is anti-gerrymandering. He describes the other as the effort to induce a system of 5-6 political parties. On both, he writes:

There’s another issue to flag about the relationship between these two versions of PR in the rhetoric around reform. I’m concerned that advocates for the second version of PR will draw on the intuitions behind the first version of PR to gain support for the second version. In other words, support for the first version of PR will become a Trojan Horse for the second version.

Descriptive racial representation and anti-gerrymandering at once

May 13, 2026

This post follows up on my earlier advice to consider minority-party representation (MPR) as an anti-gerrymandering measure. Its basics are described here and reproduced at the bottom of the post.

This week’s news has been about the potential for new Republican district maps to reduce the number of Black members of the U.S. House of Representatives. MPR can be designed to address that problem too.

Minority-party representation (MPR) to fix gerrymandering

September 25, 2025

We recommended open-list proportional representation (OLPR) in the 2023 APSA report because we reasoned that MMP was not viable. MMP stands for “mixed-member PR,” a form of proportional representation that includes single-seat districts (SSD). Here is the rationale behind our recommendation, some potential objections to that advice, and a way to resuscitate something like MMP. I will call it minority-party representation (MPR).