Contact UsSearch
Click for Search Instructions
Home > Get Involved

Submission RONBACK-0267 (Online)

Submission By Jim Ronback
AddressTsawwassen, BC, Canada
Organization
Date20040503
CategoryElectoral system change
Abstract
In recommending an electoral system, the Citizens' Assembly should ensure that the system meets the following requirements: consensus, anonymity, neutrality, transitivity, and repeatability, and must consider the usability of the ballot.  [2 pages]

Submission Content
If a recount becomes necessary, the voting method chosen by the Citizens' Assembly must provide repeatable results. The submission by Dr. Jon May, MAY-0241 (online) proposed the STV method as used in Ireland. The single transferable vote is both a preferential and proportional suffrage extension. The Irish version of STV voting method has a flaw in its design which was identified in the following report (on page 23):


If a recount is required, the same input of votes will not necessarily produce identical results. This is because there is a random selection of votes on the transfer of a surplus. This could be avoided if you dispense with the random selection in favour of a counting method such as the Gregory's rule or method.

The following sites clearly shows the merits of various methods in dealing with the transfer of the surplus:


(a) Consensus - If everyone agrees that candidate A is better than B then B will not be elected.

(b) Anonimity - Who you are should not determine your influence on the election.

(c) Neutrality - (c1) Symmetry - Electoral rules should not favour one candidate over another. (c2) The voters choice between candidates A and B should not depend on their views about some third candidate C.

(d) Transitivity - If candidate A is chosen over B and B is chosen over C, then A should be chosen over C.

(e) Repeatability - If a recount is done the same votes should provide identical results.

In the following article criteria (a to d) are used to examine majority rule (US), runoff (France) rank-order voting and instant runoff voting (as used in Australia and Ireland):

"The Fairest Vote of All", Scientific American, March 2004, by Partha Dasgupta and Eric Maskin, pp. 92-97).The CA should identify which of these criteria (a to e), if any, are violated by the voting method they will choose to recommend for a referundum.

In order to make every vote count it is also important that the CA take into consideration the usability design of the ballot. A poorly designed ballot can easily mislead a voter in making their selection, as evidenced by the one used in Florida:


© 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral ReformSite powered by levelCMSSite Map | Privacy Policy