New Zealand shifted to the German system of proportional representation in 1993, when parliamentary elections were already increasing minor party strength. Gains for Britain's third-party centrists have spotlighted the issue there, and commentators have been predicting that introduction of proportional representation will come about in the 1990s to seal a coalition bargain between the Liberal Democrats and Labour. In Australia, a form of proportional representation is already used in elections to the Senate. And in Canada, the nation's leading newspaper, the Toronto Globe and Mail , has endorsed proportional representation as a way to sort out the increasing chaos of the party system. Interest in proportional representation has grown in the United States, too, but it is small by comparison. . . .
Many possible variations exist, most of which sound complicated on first reading.
Discussion will not mushroom overnight. Small parties would get little or no benefit in small states electing only two, three, or four House members. But in large states, the effect of proportional selection would be considerable. For example, in California, where minor parties are already making some impact in congressional races, a changeover would make the state's potentially enlarged House membership of seventy-five House members elected in 2002 come in a wider variety of flavors. As one hypothetical approach, the state could be divided into five large regional districts, each of which would elect fifteen House members.