National Assembly elections
Stephen Denney sdenney at OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Wed May 30 15:24:29 PDT 2007
According to reports yesterday from Associated Press and Reuters, a 99% voter turnout was reported in the elections for the National Assembly of Vietnam, in which there were 875 candidates for 495 seats. There were 150 non-party member candidates, including 30 who were self-nominated (238 self-nominated candidates had sought approval for running), and 43 non-party candidates were elected. My question for anyone who might have an idea, how can there be such a high voter turnout, assuming the turnout was not falsified? The Reuters report provided a clue when it stated: "Voting is not compulsory but officials cajole people to cast ballots as districts compete to make sure all those eligible perform their civic duty. Many votes are cast for several members of a family by one person." I just wonder what elements of coercion, if any, might be involved to insure that every family has at least one vote on behalf of that family. I also wonder if there are other countries where an individual can cast votes on behalf of other family members (China perhaps?) and if this is a continuation of past electoral practices in Vietnam. Thanks in advance for anyone who could provide some insight into these issues. - Steve Denney
Adam at UoM fforde at unimelb.edu.au
Wed May 30 15:42:19 PDT 2007
Hi I was in Hanoi over the period. I had two impressions, based upon very little data. First, there was a general sense of anger, rather muted, more 'pissed off' than really angry, buc rather than giận, about the façade of it all. Nothing really serious but enough to make one feel that the underpinnings of the political structures were shaking, in terms of big issues such as authority. Whatever that actually means in political terms, in real time. Second, that the issue of compulsory but non-compulsory voting was not very important -"if they are serious then we will turn up". The old Polish joke 'When they stop pretending to pay us good wages we will stop pretending to work'. This is all rather old hat. The main 'kick' was the sense that things needed to change, somehow. In Australia there is not only compulsory voting but as I guess elsewhere proxy voting. Anybody else? Adam
Bill Hayton bill.hayton at bbc.co.uk
Wed May 30 16:52:51 PDT 2007
Two other factors worth mentioning too... 1. A senior official from the National Assembly told me privately, but candidly, that local officials routinely exaggerate the turnout numbers to make themselves look good to their superiors. (Not exactly a revelation but proof that senior figures know that it happens and ignore it.) 2. The link between voting and Gia Dinh Van Hoa status - not voting would probably endanger the family certificate the following year. It's also worth noting that the proportion of non-Party members of the NA has actually fallen - from 10.3% to 8.7% despite a public and relatively vigorous debate about the merits of increasing it to as much as 20% in the weeks before the vote. Bill Hayton (BBC Vietnam reporter 2006-7)
Stephen Denney sdenney at OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Wed May 30 17:04:09 PDT 2007
An added note: only one self-nominated candidate was elected to the National Assembly. Steve Denney
william turley wturley at siu.edu
Wed May 30 17:20:47 PDT 2007
I would have to go back to my books on this one, but I recall it is established in the literature that it is physically impossible to generate a 99% turnout anywhere without some measure of compulsion, taking ballot boxes into hospitals and factories, time off for voting, mobilization campaigns, and maybe just a little bit of fakery by local officials under pressure to do their bit. Bill Turley
tonthat at homemail.com.au tonthat at homemail.com.au
Wed May 30 18:26:29 PDT 2007
Dear list, Ninety nine percent voting turnout is nothing new to Vietnam. I seem to recall, from my childhood years, 99% under Diem and 99.5% under Thieu and Ky The more things change ... Du
nguyen cam nguyennguyetcam1 at yahoo.com
Wed May 30 18:30:37 PDT 2007
Hi list, For more on how compulsory voting worked in practice during the recent election, please see the following link to a BBC story. Ca^`m http://www.bbc.co.uk/vietnamese/vietnam/story/2007/05/070520_electionday.shtml
Pam McElwee pamela.mcelwee at asu.edu
Wed May 30 19:34:38 PDT 2007
Dear list: I was involved in a study on democracy and participation in Vietnam for the UNDP in 2005-2006 which some on the list may find of interest on this topic. The whole study is available for download at: http:// www.undp.org.vn/undpLive/digitalAssets/ 4856_Grassroot_democracy.pdf . The study addressed a number of issues, including elections. In interviews with some high ranking NA officials and others, they admitted that "proxy voting" both by members of the same households, and particularly in rural areas of village heads proxy voting for others in their village, is widespread. The study was completed in spring 2006 and mainly relied on info from the 2002 NA elections, but I don't believe the problems we highlighted of proxy voting and lack of citizen involvement in the nomination process have significantly changed in this latest round. Vietnam does not allow foreign monitoring of elections that I know of (unlike China which has been inviting observers like the Carter Center to come monitor their elections in the past few rounds) which means we lack a lot of information about how voting and vote counting is actually done. How much voting is 'coerced' (harassing phone calls and the head of the neighborhood and various officials coming to visit starting early morning on election day are standards in urban areas at least) and how much is 'proxy voting' in order to achieve such high official voter turn out numbers is not totally clear. China is in my opinion a bit further on in its attention to the process of elections in general. Proxy voting has officially been banned (though I am sure it still takes place in some areas), and some localities have been experimenting with open elections to Party Secretary, non-Party approved nominations to local positions, etc. The process remains more constricted in VN, especially the nominations process. You can nominate yourself (under the law) but you have to be approved by the Fatherland Front to get on the ballot. Less than 15% of people who tried to get on the NA ballot this time made it past this first hurdle, and we still await to see if any of them won. There is still a lot of top down control of the nominations in order to ensure "representative" proportions of women, minority, non-Party, etc NA candidates. Despite the attention to "representativeness", however, a very large proportion of candidates are university-educated government cadres and party officials, not the farmers, fishermen, petty traders, businesspeople, etc who constitute the bulk of the electorate. Many NA parliamentarians will hold down official jobs like Head of MoLISA, provincial People's Committee Chairman, etc, back in their home province, since the NA meets at limited times during the year. This raises interesting executive-legislative branch separation issues. It also means parliamentarians are not very skilled at constituent services since they have other full time jobs. Being more constituent-oriented is something high ranking people at the NA have indicated they want to do more of in the future, but that remains to be seen. Here is some additional info from the report I mentioned reprinted below. It was published in both English and Vietnamese in VN so is somewhat circumscribed in its description of election problems for obvious reasons. However, this caution I think has worked as a way to discuss difficult things more openly within VN: I understand Tuoi Tre had a long article about it and gave the report a good review and quoted from it extensively before the elections this spring. From "Deepening Democracy and Increasing Popular Participation in Vietnam": "Viet Nam claims to hold democratic elections, but the term is often a source of confusion. The concept of a democratic election needs to be distinguished from that of competitive elections, which implies that more than one candidate stands for each available post. The concept of democratic elections generally includes reference to ‘the way candidates are nominated and selected, if the anonymity and secrecy of the ballot is guaranteed, if there is a modicum of campaigning and if there are safeguards against vote-rigging (sealed ballot boxes, independent election workers, open ballot count etc.)’ These issues have not yet been adequately addressed yet in Viet Nam. For example, ‘proxy voting,’ whereby the head or a representative of a household casts votes for everyone in the household, is widespread in rural Viet Nam. This can have the effect of disenfranchising women if they do not have the chance to discuss their vote with their husbands before he casts it for them. China no longer allows proxy voting because of these concerns. While Viet Nam’s laws do not officially allow proxy voting, in reality it is widespread. Many local elected officials compete with each other to have the largest number of votes cast in the shortest amount of time on election days, meaning that proxy voting is seen as an easy way to achieve the goal of high turnout. There has been some work by donors in the area of electoral reform, focusing on improving election transparency and election monitoring. One UNDP project aimed to support the Government in the management, preparation and monitoring of the local elections for People’s Councils held in May 2004. The project helped with the establishment of the first-ever web site for local elections and also worked with the government to disseminate rules and procedures establishing the legal framework for the elections. Donors could do more to help in these areas. For example, in China, the Ministry of Home Affairs has invited a range of international NGOs, including the Ford Foundation and the US-based Carter Centre, to observe local elections and help implement secret balloting and provide supervision of poll overseers. The subsequent media attention to China’s emerging electoral democracy has improved its image abroad. Viet Nam could benefit in similar ways. Other suggestions to increase citizen confidence and participation include the elimination of proxy voting and enforcement of secret ballot provisions, rather than a show of hands, at public meetings. Nomination procedures for candidates presents an additional opportunity. Originally the Grassroots Democracy Decree in 1998 allowed for open local discussion of nominations for election, but this provision was removed from Decree 79 in 2003. The nomination of candidates has been assigned to the Fatherland Front. Opening up the nominations process to the public would stimulate participation among villagers and provide a check on ineffective and dishonest officials. There may be direct economic and governance benefits from these proposed changes. In a survey in China, completed before and after the first open village leader elections, villagers indicated that they felt more empowered in lodging complaints with the authorities and more likely to use their vote as a tool to get rid of ineffective leaders. Another study found that those villages that had held competitive elections showed achieved greater consensus among villagers and local cadres on a variety of policy issues, meaning that local opinion was better represented in more pro-poor policies. Others have noted that free and fair elections can increase trust between villagers and cadres, with villagers then more likely to contribute financially to village projects. Another area deserving of attention is campaigning. Campaigning is conducted rather formalistically in Viet Nam, with the Fatherland Front inviting only specific voters to come to meet the candidates. Sensitive issues are rarely addressed. This puts a damper on citizen involvement in governance. As an example, prior to elections to the NA in 2002, the FF in Thua Thien Hue organized 40 meetings attended by 5,559 people. However only 307 constituents out of a province of more than a million people raised questions and exchanged ideas and recommendations with candidates. Limits on campaigning mean that voters have less access to information, especially those who have less contact with the mass media. Voters choose primarily on the basis of familiar names and strong resumes, rather than on the issues. In the absence of more campaigning and easier access to candidates, voters will continue to find it hard to tell the candidates apart. This diminishes electoral officials’ sense of responsibility, as they do not feel accountable to the electorate. The lack of campaigning is partly a reflection of the emphasis within Viet Nam on unity rather than difference, and partly a fear that variation in political positions would lead to instability."
Pam McElwee Arizona State Pamela McElwee Assistant Professor of Global Studies Arizona State University Coor Hall 5648pamela.mcelwee at asu.edu (480) 727-0736
(office) Mailing Address: School of Global Studies Arizona State University P.O. Box 875102 Tempe, AZ 85287-5102
Andrew Wells-Dang andrewwd at gmail.com
Wed May 30 21:23:09 PDT 2007
Pam's points are well taken. Proxy voting can happen in urban areas too. Another procedural issue in the NA elections that often surprises outside observers is the fact that one does not have to be a resident of the district/province in which one is standing for election; in fact, many central-level officials are candidates in distant provinces where they may have little or no personal connection. So it's not just that parliamentarians hold government jobs in their home provinces, but many hold government jobs in Hanoi or elsewhere. Although I don't understand well how this happens, my impression is that candidates may not always have a choice over where they are assigned to stand for election; this may even be true for candidates who are not Party members (but are still approved by the Fatherland Front). Requiring candidates to reside in the districts they represent is common in many democracies, while others (ie Germany, Indonesia) have mixed systems in which some seats are reserved for party lists or specific constituencies. Of course, the requirement can be fudged by moving one's official residence to a district just in time to get elected, like Hillary Clinton did in New York, or Dick Cheney moving from Texas to Wyoming to avoid the US constitutional ban on a president and a vice president coming from the same state. Still, in theory, one would get a more representative assembly this way, and possibly more citizen participation in the process. I've heard anecdotes that voters in some Vietnamese provinces complained about outside candidates who came in to campaign meetings and thanked the voters of a district different from the one they were actually campaigning in. As Pam says, the results will show how well these candidates did at the polls. Andrew Wells-Dang
Stephen Denney sdenney at OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Wed May 30 21:42:36 PDT 2007
Has this practice of proxy voting in National Assembly elections been a standard feature in past NA elections in Vietnam including the pre-Doi Moi era? I would think in the more regimentated era one purpose of the elections would be to run every eligible voter through the process of voting as a way of getting everyone personally involved in supporting the political leadership. Allowing proxy voting would seem to lessen actual voter participation, aside from conributing to misleading voter turnout results. - Steve Denney
Pam Mcelwee pamela.mcelwee at asu.edu
Wed May 30 23:02:48 PDT 2007
Andrew is quite right about people being 'assigned' to represent constituencies in which they do not necessarily live - it is all part of the high levels of control and 'balancing' in the nominations process. I also forgot to add in my earlier posting that since the NA election in 2002, 118 deputies of the NA have been full-time legislators. That was a first, and the idea was to use them as little 'experiment' to see if better legislating and better constituent responses would be possible if one was working full time as a legislator, and had a staff to help. I am not sure if the number of full time deputies will increase in this latest round and if anyone has this info I would appreciate hearing it. The 2002 law also required NA candidates to declare their assets during campaigns for the first time. I have not been in Vietnam for the election this year and would be interested to hear from anyone who is if there was any discussion of candidate's financial assets during any of the campaigns. It may not make much difference to voters since corruption can always be hidden. Of note is the fact that in the 2002 NA elections, only 14 people out of 498 elected were 'officially' private businesspeople. Quite a difference from say the US Congress which consists of a number of millionaires.... Another interesting statistic is that MoHA estimates only around 8.5% of People's Council members at all levels are 'ordinary people' and not party members, in the civil service or mass organizations, or in the army. Regarding Adam's points on party membership requirements for village heads, I would wager in many rural areas the leader is not a party member, probably at levels higher than Adam's 20% guesstimate. Maybe as high as half, particularly since 1998 when elections to village head were legalized in the Grassroots democracy decree? Considering that some very remote villages (esp minority villages) have NO party members or cells, it would impossible to have a village head who was a party member. And since the village head is not supposed to also be the local party secretary (in practice it may not always work) you need at least 2 party members per village to pull this off. We were told in 2005 that 90% of village heads were 'freely elected' - that is there were two or more candidates available for a vote at a village meeting with a quorum of at least 50% of households present to vote (though proxy voting no doubt occurred). Presumably the remaining 10% of village heads were exclusively party appointed if 2 candidates could not be found or there were fears someone unacceptable might be voted in. And on Adam's point about getting elected first or being a party member first, some localities in China are doing some interesting experiments. One is called the ‘two-ballot-system’ for party secretary positions. Under this system all villagers may cast a free nomination for the party secretary’s position. The two candidates attracting the most nominations then compete in an intra- party run-off election restricted to party members. Thus, villagers have an indirect say in the selection of their party secretary. In other places, the party secretary is required to have first been popularly elected to a Village Council (which confirms his or her local acceptability), after which he or she may be appointed party secretary by higher-ups. Will VN look north for examples on this? There have certainly been recent discussions on reforming Party membership..... time will tell. I do not know the answer to Stephen's question on how long proxy voting has been around. I am guessing you are right in that it is a more recent development, given busy urban lives, huge numbers of migrant populations, etc. It would have been much easier to round individual people up to vote pre doi moi when household registrations were stricter, you lived and worked in the same place in an SoE or coop, etc. Pam McElwee
Markus Vorpahl m_vorpahl at web.de
Thu May 31 03:25:52 PDT 2007
Dear all - Anecdotal evidence for different points of view: I spent the election days in a village and commune in Bac Ninh. There, local leadership was proud to achieve something over 85% of participation on the evening of 20 May. The leitmotif of the administration, at least that repeated by the village cadres, commune party and officials, and apparently of the assistant teams passing to prepare the election, was: "It looks strange to have elections where 98, 99 or 100% vote. It is just not possible, people are always sick, too old, fed up or away." Therefore, I was pretty surprised when after returning to Hanoi, the 99% official participation was announced. I still have to get some local feedback on that. The reason to work differently and more transparent in Bac Ninh was apparently a repetition of the last election in some of the constituencies of the province due to fraud - but nobody could explain exactly what had happened. Does anybody on the list remember? Markus Vorpahl
Adam at UoM fforde at unimelb.edu.au
Wed May 30 22:03:29 PDT 2007
Many thanks to Pam for sharing this. There is a raft of very interesting material in the development practice literature (another thon to go with the Vietnam Studies thon, the Vietnamese-American thon, Vern's thon, etc etc etc). Empirically, there are two issues that I think are very interesting in this area. First, what proportion of village (thon, ban) heads are not Party members? Anecdotally, it seems not uncommon and not too contentious that the population rejects the Party's suggested candidate, and for normal reasons of practical government the village gets somebody acceptable, who is not a Party member. What is the trend? I would guess 20% and upwards - anybody else? Second, of those village leaders who are Party members, what proportion did NOT come through 'apparat politics', and so do not get votes because of their position (duoc bau vi vi tri) , but get their position because they can get votes (duoc vi tri vi duoc bau)? Here I have no idea but again I would guess a surprisingly high percentage and a rising trend. And I did not make up the Vietnamese in the earlier sentence. With the decentralisation of resources to commune budgets, the first round of hungry mouths seems usually to see them linked to MOs, but I would not be surprised if the local politics rapidly evolves to attach the mouths to villages, or something like that. Anybody? An interesting aside, based upon some reading I have been doing, is that official texts (on 'thon truong va to truong to dan pho') state clearly that village chiefs are duty-bound - and therefore formally competent - to sign contracts for infrastructure and survive delivery in their villages. Most of the literature generated by development programs (Vietnamese and foreign) argues strongly, though, that this is impossible as only communes have adequate status. Hardly surprising, of course, but stark. Adam
Joe Hannah jhannah at u.washington.edu
Wed May 30 21:01:49 PDT 2007
Anecdotally, I have heard from many Vietnamese that the head of household, bearing the family's Ho Khau book, could and frequently does vote for evryone listed. This would make very high percentages easier to obtain. Joe Hannah
frank.proschan at yahoo.com frank.proschan at yahoo.com
Thu May 31 08:42:51 PDT 2007
Colleagues, Drawing together two recent threads, that on the just-completed NA elections and the one labeled "UW Guests from Viet Nam Bullied" (a verb I chose not to adopt in my subject line), I cannot resist offering an anecdote from a decade ago (at risk of being charged with anachronism, obsolescence, nostalgia, or worse). While escorting two distinguished senior Vietnamese colleagues on a speaking tour of several prominent U.S. universities, not long after the elections to the NA khoa X (?) in November 1997, our itinerary included a large West Coast university (name changed to protect the innocent). Although the topics of their lectures had nothing to do with current politics, a local emigre organization had decided to take advantage of their visit to make propaganda against the Vietnamese government and its policies. Those of their members in attendance were respectfully quiet during the lectures, but in the question and answer period a number of them tore into the speakers with irrelevant and inaccurate accusations against the SRV. They asserted--without foundation--that there was no freedom of speech in Vietnam, and that the lecturers had to clear the text of their lectures with the police before they were allowed to leave Vietnam. They insisted that the recent NA elections were a sham, and wrongly claimed that only Party candidates were allowed to run. (One member came up quietly afterward and offered to help the speakers defect!) Unbeknownst to the hostile audience members, one of the professors had recently stood for election to the NA, as the Party-designated candidate in an electoral district far from his home (cf Andrew Wells-Dang's post on non-resident candidates sent down "from the center"). Also unbeknownst to the audience, he had been repudiated by the voters in the constituency in favor of their own local candidate. (Had he been victorious, he would have been too busy to carry out the lecture tour, so he was happy to have done his duty to serve as a candidate and even more happy to have been defeated.) The anecdote is appealing because it complexifies both the thread labeled as "UW Guests from Viet Nam Bullied" (and its more neutrally designated sibling thread, "Vietnamese-American demonstrations") and the recent unpleasantness on the VSG list. My guests were the targets of behavior some might perhaps consider bullying, but certainly not its victims. One had withstood French bombs at Dien Bien Phu and the other had withstood American bombs a decade later, so the barbs of Vietnamese American complainers had little sting for them. Yet doubtless many potential audience members were actual victims of intimidation, unwilling to join the audience for fear of being labeled commie-symps or worse. My friends were not in the least intimidated by the demonstrators; but innocent and curious young Vietnamese Americans doubtless were intimidated, and that was highly unfortunate. To return to the genesis of our present strife, what offended me greatly in Calvin Thai's message of 16 May (has it only been two weeks!?!) was that, like the organization that mobilized a hostile audience to greet my colleagues in 1997, there seemed an element of opportunism or gratuitousness in his intervention. Hoang Dan Lieu alerted VSG members to an innocuous, rather predictable essay by Dang Quoc Bao. Without engaging the substance of Professor Bao's paper, Mr Thai instead took advantage of the thread begun by Lieu to voice a number of canards against Ho Chi Minh that neither Bao nor Lieu had raised or advocated. At best, this is bad listserv etiquette, to hijack a thread to a purpose different than the original poster. If Mr Thai feared an onslaught of May birthday propaganda, he had already let 15 days in May pass without starting his own thread to alert VSG readers to beware of what he perceived as an annual campaign of systematic deceptions. Instead, he responded to a neutral and dare I say innocent posting by Lieu to attack Lieu and Bao as--in Thai's own words--propagandists, perpetrators of half-truths, negligent in their duty to seek truth, and spreaders of deception. These are classic examples of ad hominem attacks, attempting to discredit the argument by instead discrediting the advocate. Such charges against an assumedly legitimate scholar such as Bao or a budding scholar such as Lieu seemed to me offensive, especially when the supposed counter-evidence or counter-arguments Mr Thai offered had nothing to do with either Bao or Lieu's own statements or opinions. It was Mr Thai's argumentation, not his argument, that I found offensive. Had Mr Thai begun an independent thread rather than hijacking Lieu's, or had he responded with the thoughtfulness and respect he showed in his 27 May message, I for one would not have taken exception. I do however take exception to the efforts of others to redefine this as a conflict over opinions rather than one over rhetoric. VSG has always tolerated a very wide spectrum of political statements and perspectives. I daresay no three of us would agree on anything. Yet VSG has adopted a code of conduct that asks for, and depends upon, a degree of good will and mutual respect that, in my view and evidently the view of a number of others, Mr Thai did not display in his 16 May posting. In response, others intervened with equally or even more disrespectful comments. That is all regrettable. But I repudiate anyone's efforts to redefine this as a conflict over the content of Mr Thai's political opinions and thus as a systematic attempt to stifle his freedom of speech, when it was indeed a conflict over his rhetorical style and argumentative methods. Best to all, Frank Proschan
Hue-Tam Ho Tai hhtai at fas.harvard.edu
Thu May 31 08:56:41 PDT 2007
In 2003, I was asked to participate in a meeting to discuss curriculum reforms at an Institute. I planned on making somewhat impromptu remarks, to respond to other participants'contributions so that my own would not be repetitive or too tangential. But it was not to be. I was asked, upon my arrival in Hanoi (a day or two before the meeting), for a copy of my remarks. They had to be submitted to some agency and vetted. So I frantically wrote something (in English, I was too jet-lagged and working to too tight a deadline to produce a document in Vietnamese) about the structure of higher education at my own institution, and a Vietnamese colleague even more frantically organized for my remarks to be translated into Vietnamese. Things have changed since 1997, but not everything, and not as fast as one might like. There is indeed a lot of misinformation about Vietnam among expatriates, just as there is a lot of misinformation about the US in Vietnam. I personally find it fascinating to listen to Viet Kieu in the US and then meet their relatives in Vietnam and listen to their own experiences and perspectives. Hue-Tam Ho Tai
Shawn McHale mchale at gwu.edu
Thu May 31 10:33:45 PDT 2007
Dear list, I would like to come to the defense of Calvin Thai, and suggest that we no more discuss the post of his that led to my response that led to such acrimony on this list. I apologized off-list to Mr. Thai -- whatever one thinks about the content of my original post, it was stupidly phrased, and I have no problem with the fact that others chastised me for that. The original dispute is too far in the past for people to remember it all that accurately. Mr. Thai is a person of good will, and was gracious to me when e-mailed me. Let us leave it at that. I personally would prefer to see posts, for the next week, on topics such as the joy of eating Vietnamese mangoes (and please no fight over whether Filipino ones are better:) ) Incidentally -- and this is related to the National Assembly thread -- Tuoi Tre had an online article on a blog by National Assembly member Duong Trung Quoc, a historian whom some of you may have met. Does anyone know where the blog is?? Cheers,
Stephen Denney sdenney at OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Thu May 31 17:46:24 PDT 2007
People can speak more freely in Vietnam today than in the pre-doi moi era, but I don't think it can be said that freedom of speech exists as a right in Vietnam. Witness the recent trials of dissidents, who were found guilty of violating Article 88 of the Criminal Code, agains "conducting propaganda against the Socialist Republic of Vietnam," and were sentenced to prison. These and other national security provisions of the code are worded broadly enough to justify any repression of dissent, and date back to the 1967 DRV Law on Counter-revolutionary Crimes. Regarding the National Assembly elections, I believe it has always been the case that some non-Party members have been included as candidates. - Steve Denney
Ben Kerkvliet ben.kerkvliet at anu.edu.au
Thu May 31 17:18:35 PDT 2007
List members interested in voting methods and procedures will find useful chapter three in David Koh's /Wards of Hanoi/ (Singapore: ISEAS, 2006). Ben