Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Santucci, Jack
Data de Publicação: 2021
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3955
Resumo: Ranked-choice voting has come to mean a range of electoral systems. Broadly, they can facilitate (a) majority winners in single-seat districts, (b) majority rule with minority representation in multi-seat districts, or (c) majority sweeps in multi-seat districts. Further, such systems can combine with rules to encourage/discourage slate voting. This article describes five major versions used, abandoned, and/or proposed for US public elections: alternative vote, single transferable vote, block-preferential voting, the bottoms-up system, and alternative vote with numbered posts. It then considers each from the perspective of a ‘political strategist.’ Simple models of voting (one with two parties, another with three) draw attention to real-world strategic issues: effects on minority representation, importance of party cues, and reasons for the political strategist to care about how voters rank choices. Unsurprisingly, different rules produce different outcomes with the same sets of ballots. Specific problems from the strategist’s perspective are: ‘majority reversal,’ serving ‘two masters,’ and undisciplined third-party voters (or ‘pure’ independents). Some of these stem from well-known phenomena, e.g., ranking truncation and ‘vote leakage.’ The article also alludes to ‘vote-management’ tactics, i.e., rationing nominations and ensuring even distributions of first-choice votes. Illustrative examples come from American history and comparative politics. A running theme is the two-pronged failure of the Progressive Era reform wave: with respect to minority representation, then ranked voting's durability.
id RCAP_157ca37040d55dd992ba47462532d400
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3955
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspectivealternative vote; ballot exhaustion; block-preferential voting; bottoms-up system; exhaustive-preferential system; instant runoff voting; ranked-choice voting; open-list proportional representation; single transferable vote; strategic coordinationRanked-choice voting has come to mean a range of electoral systems. Broadly, they can facilitate (a) majority winners in single-seat districts, (b) majority rule with minority representation in multi-seat districts, or (c) majority sweeps in multi-seat districts. Further, such systems can combine with rules to encourage/discourage slate voting. This article describes five major versions used, abandoned, and/or proposed for US public elections: alternative vote, single transferable vote, block-preferential voting, the bottoms-up system, and alternative vote with numbered posts. It then considers each from the perspective of a ‘political strategist.’ Simple models of voting (one with two parties, another with three) draw attention to real-world strategic issues: effects on minority representation, importance of party cues, and reasons for the political strategist to care about how voters rank choices. Unsurprisingly, different rules produce different outcomes with the same sets of ballots. Specific problems from the strategist’s perspective are: ‘majority reversal,’ serving ‘two masters,’ and undisciplined third-party voters (or ‘pure’ independents). Some of these stem from well-known phenomena, e.g., ranking truncation and ‘vote leakage.’ The article also alludes to ‘vote-management’ tactics, i.e., rationing nominations and ensuring even distributions of first-choice votes. Illustrative examples come from American history and comparative politics. A running theme is the two-pronged failure of the Progressive Era reform wave: with respect to minority representation, then ranked voting's durability.Cogitatio2021-06-15info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3955oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3955Politics and Governance; Vol 9, No 2 (2021): The Politics, Promise and Peril of Ranked Choice Voting; 344-3532183-2463reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3955https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3955https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3955/3955Copyright (c) 2021 Jack Santuccihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSantucci, Jack2022-12-22T15:16:26Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3955Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:22:22.543677Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
title Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
spellingShingle Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
Santucci, Jack
alternative vote; ballot exhaustion; block-preferential voting; bottoms-up system; exhaustive-preferential system; instant runoff voting; ranked-choice voting; open-list proportional representation; single transferable vote; strategic coordination
title_short Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
title_full Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
title_fullStr Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
title_full_unstemmed Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
title_sort Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
author Santucci, Jack
author_facet Santucci, Jack
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Santucci, Jack
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv alternative vote; ballot exhaustion; block-preferential voting; bottoms-up system; exhaustive-preferential system; instant runoff voting; ranked-choice voting; open-list proportional representation; single transferable vote; strategic coordination
topic alternative vote; ballot exhaustion; block-preferential voting; bottoms-up system; exhaustive-preferential system; instant runoff voting; ranked-choice voting; open-list proportional representation; single transferable vote; strategic coordination
description Ranked-choice voting has come to mean a range of electoral systems. Broadly, they can facilitate (a) majority winners in single-seat districts, (b) majority rule with minority representation in multi-seat districts, or (c) majority sweeps in multi-seat districts. Further, such systems can combine with rules to encourage/discourage slate voting. This article describes five major versions used, abandoned, and/or proposed for US public elections: alternative vote, single transferable vote, block-preferential voting, the bottoms-up system, and alternative vote with numbered posts. It then considers each from the perspective of a ‘political strategist.’ Simple models of voting (one with two parties, another with three) draw attention to real-world strategic issues: effects on minority representation, importance of party cues, and reasons for the political strategist to care about how voters rank choices. Unsurprisingly, different rules produce different outcomes with the same sets of ballots. Specific problems from the strategist’s perspective are: ‘majority reversal,’ serving ‘two masters,’ and undisciplined third-party voters (or ‘pure’ independents). Some of these stem from well-known phenomena, e.g., ranking truncation and ‘vote leakage.’ The article also alludes to ‘vote-management’ tactics, i.e., rationing nominations and ensuring even distributions of first-choice votes. Illustrative examples come from American history and comparative politics. A running theme is the two-pronged failure of the Progressive Era reform wave: with respect to minority representation, then ranked voting's durability.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-06-15
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3955
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3955
url https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3955
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3955
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3955
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3955
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3955/3955
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Jack Santucci
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Jack Santucci
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Politics and Governance; Vol 9, No 2 (2021): The Politics, Promise and Peril of Ranked Choice Voting; 344-353
2183-2463
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130669547257856