Alternative Election Systems
February 6, 2017
Presented by
Tony Ludovico and John Peeler
Alternative Election Systems
Some definitions to keep in mind:
A majority happens when more than half of the
electorate votes for one candidate.
A plurality happens when less than half the
ballots are cast for a candidate that wins
because the votes are split among more than
two candidates.
Alternative Election Systems
Example: A Two Candidate Race
POPULATION: 14, 756 PEOPLE
ELECTORATE: 10,000 ELIGIBLE VOTERS
Votes Cast
MAJORITY WIN:
Candidate A
5,001
Candidate B
4,999
Total
10,000
(More than one-half the electorate voted for Candidate A)
PLURALITY WIN
Candidate A
4,000
Candidate B
3,000
Total
7,000
(Fewer than one-half the electorate voted for Candidate A)
Alternative Election Systems
Example: A Multiple Candidate Race
POPULATION: 14, 756 PEOPLE
ELECTORATE: 10,000 ELIGIBLE VOTERS
Votes Cast
MAJORITY WIN:
Candidate A
5,001
Candidate B
4,000
Candidate C
999
Total
10,000
(More than one-half the electorate voted for Candidate A)
PLURALITY WIN
Candidate A
3,000
Candidate B
2,999
Candidate C
1,001
Total
7,000
(Fewer than one-half the electorate voted for Candidate A)
Alternative Election Systems
LWVPA and LWVUS currently have no position
with regard to alternatives to the plurality or
“winner take all” election systems used in most
state and local elections.
Why is This a Problem?
Wasted votes
Supporters of the minority party in a jurisdiction and
minor party supporters feel their votes are “wasted”.
Lack of proportional representation
Minority and minor parties are under-represented or
not represented at all.
Proportional Representation
Two Types of Elections
• Single winner elections (such as for governor,
mayor, or representatives to a multi-member
body such as state legislature or city council
elected from single member districts).
• Multiple winner elections such as city or county
council members elected at large.*
*Some jurisdictions have a Mixed Multi-member system – some
elected at large and some elected from single or multi- member
districts.
Single Winner Elections
 Most single winner elections in PA use the
“Single-Vote Plurality” Method
to determine the winner
 Each voter casts a ballot for only one candidate
 The candidate with the most votes wins
Advantages:
 Traditional
 Simplest of all Methods
 Known and understood by most voters
Single Winner Systems
Disadvantages of single-vote plurality elections:
 Winner may be viewed as being less legitimate
• A “plurality” winner is not necessarily seen as winner of the
“majority” of votes
 Failure to represent majority preferences
• In low-turnout elections, the winner may not be a “Condorcet”
winner, with views that reflect those of the majority of voters
 The third party candidate may serve as a “spoiler” enabling the
1st runner-up to defeat the front-runner
 May encourage voters to vote “strategically” rather than
“sincerely”
 Fear of spoilers motivates major parties to impede minor party
access to a place on the ballot
Does PA Need Alternative Methods for
Single-Winner Elections?
Multi-candidate contests in single-winner
elections are not infrequent in PA.
Examples:
Presidential Elections
State and Local Offices
Primaries
Single Winner Elections
Tested Alternative
Runoffs
Sample Ballot
Voter can choose only one candidate.
If no candidate gets a
majority of the votes,
some jurisdictions
require holding a
second (runoff)
election between the
top two vote-getters.
Single Winner Elections
Tested Alternative
Instant Runoff Voting
Voters can choose more than one and rank their choices.
Single Winner Elections
Less Tested Alternatives
 The Borda Count
(like athletic team rankings)
 Approval Voting
(like some academic assn. voting)
 Range Voting
(like feedback surveys)
Legislative and Other
Multiple Winner Elections
Problems with legislative elections in PA
• Gerrymandering
• Lack of competition
• Partisan bias
• Under-representation of women &
minorities
• Nearly impossible for minor parties to
win representation.
Legislative Elections
PA Congressional Districts
Example of Gerrymandered
Voting Districts
Two Not-Recommended
Multi-Member Systems
• Multiple-winner extension of single-winner
plurality (Block Vote) – Each elector can vote
for the same number of candidates as there
are seats to be filled e.g. Delaware County
Council.
• Party-List Proportional Representation Citizens cast votes for parties, not individuals.
Each party gets seats proportional to its votes.
Outcome of a Multi-Member Body
Using Single Member Plurality
Alternatives for Legislative Elections
•
•
•
•
Mixed-member proportional vote
Single transferable vote
Limited voting
Cumulative voting
Alternatives for Legislative Elections
•
•
•
•
Mixed-member proportional vote
Single transferable vote
Limited voting
Cumulative voting
Mixed-Member Proportional Vote (MMP)
• Majority of legislators elected by plurality from
single member districts as they are now.
• Additional members are chosen from statewide
lists nominated by the parties. Through a system
known as “compensatory allocation”, the number
each party gets is designed to establish
proportionality between its statewide vote and its
total number of legislators.
Mixed-Member Proportional Vote
Advantages
• Parties have an incentive to compete everywhere.
• Increases voter turnout as votes in every district will be
meaningful.
• Party getting most votes statewide gets the most seats.
• Partisan gerrymandering inconsequential.
• Where used has increased representation of women and
minorities.
• Under two vote MMP system a minor party can better
compete.
• Maintains tradition of representation based local
geographic constituencies.
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
• A form of Ranked Choice Voting in multimember districts.
• Electors rank candidates in order of
preference.
• Winners are those that exceed a quota of total
votes divided by M + 1 where M = Number of
seats to be filled.
• Surplus votes from winning candidates are reassigned to the voter’s second choices.
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
SAMPLE BALLOT
Voter marks ballot in order of preference. Only the first preferences are counted in
the initial round of counting. If necessary, votes are transferred to second or later
preferences in subsequent rounds of counting.
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
Example of Vote Counting
Number of open seats = 3; Number of Voters = 1000;
Votes needed to win = 250
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
Although some voters won’t get their first choice, almost all
will get one of their other choices.
Single Transferable Voting
Advantages
• Promotes voting for individuals rather than
parties.
• Well suited for local elections where party
affiliation is less important.
• With multi-member legislative districts parties
can win at least one seat in most districts.
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
Disadvantages
• Vote counting process is complicated.
• There is intra-party competition.
• Not a sure remedy for problems with state
legislature- gerrymandering, proportionality,
women and minority representation.
• Does not guarantee party with most votes
gets the most seats.
Limited Voting
Voters cast fewer votes than seats to be filled.
Republican Voter
•
•
•
•
•
Democratic Voter
At least one member of minority party will be elected.
Used in most PA counties to election three member county commissions
Used to elect at-large Philadelphia City Council members
As alternative to block voting, is easier to implement than MMP or STV.
To avoid intra-party competition, works best if parties can only nominate fewer
candidates than seats to be filled, but minority party will then present less challenge to
dominant party.
Cumulative voting
• Allows voter to cast multiple votes for one or more
candidates up to the number of seats to be filled.
• PA School Code expressly prohibits cumulative voting in
school director elections.
One and Two Vote MMP Systems Compared
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
Example of Vote Counting
Number of open seats = 3; Number of Voters = 1000;
Votes needed to win = 250