Contingent vote

Last updated

A flowchart for the contingent vote. IRV-toptwo flowchart.png
A flowchart for the contingent vote.

The contingent vote is an electoral system used to elect a single representative in which a candidate requires a majority of votes to win. It is a form of preferential voting. The voter ranks the candidates in order of preference, and when the votes are counted, the first preference votes only are counted. If no candidate has a majority (more than half) of the votes cast, then all but the two leading candidates are eliminated and the votes received by the eliminated candidates are distributed among the two remaining candidates according to voters' preferences. This ensures that one candidate achieves a majority and is declared elected.

Contents

The contingent vote can be considered a compressed or "instant" form of the two-round system (runoff system), in which both "rounds" occur without the need for voters to go to the polls twice. For this reason, the term instant-runoff voting has also been used for this method,[ citation needed ] though this conflicts with the more common meaning.

It also has similarities to other ranked-choice systems. Unlike the contingent vote, systems like instant-runoff voting (IRV), Coombs' method, and Baldwin's method allow for many rounds of counting, eliminating only one weakest candidate each round. IRV allows a candidate other than the top two in the first count to win.

Usage

A limited variant of the contingent vote has been used to elect the President of Sri Lanka since 1978. [1]

A more limited variant, called the supplementary vote, was used to pick directly elected mayors and police and crime commissioners in England prior to 2022.

In the past, the ordinary form of the contingent vote was used to elect the Legislative Assembly of Queensland from 1892 to 1942. To date, this has been the longest continuous use of the system anywhere in the world. [1]

Contingent voting was used for Democratic party primaries in the US state of Alabama from 1915 to 1931. [1]

Voting and counting

Example of optional preferential ballot paper. Preferential ballot.svg
Example of optional preferential ballot paper.

In an election held using the contingent vote, the voters rank the list of candidates in order of preference. Under the most common ballot layout, they place a '1' beside their most preferred candidate, a '2' beside their second most preferred, and so on. In this respect the contingent vote is the same as other ranked ballot methods.

There are then a maximum of two rounds of counting. In the first round only first preferences are counted. Candidates receiving an absolute majority of first preferences (i.e. more than half) are immediately declared the winner. However, if no candidate has an absolute majority, then all but the two candidates with the most first preferences are eliminated, and there is a second round. In the second round, the votes of the voters whose first preference had been eliminated are transferred to whichever of the two remaining candidates they ranked the highest. The votes are then counted, and whichever candidate has an absolute majority is declared elected.

Impact on factions and candidates

Like instant-runoff voting and the two-round system, the goal of the contingent vote is to enable a majority of voters to confirm the winner of an election. This majority rule requirement encourages candidates to seek support beyond their core base of supporters in order to secure the lower preferences of the supporters of other candidates. This is said to create a more conciliatory campaigning style among candidates with similar policy platforms.[ citation needed ] However this effect will be diminished by the fact that lower preferences are less important under the contingent vote than under IRV; under the contingent vote it is especially important for candidates to receive many first preferences so that they are not eliminated straight away.

Compared to plurality voting, the contingent vote does aid the chances of 'third party' candidates to some extent, as voters do not need to be afraid a vote for a minor third party will spoil the election for a stronger party candidate, as long as their second preference candidate can make the top-two requirement.

However, when there are three or more similarly strong candidates, the spoiler effect still exists, just as it does in two-round runoff or IRV: voting honestly for a favorite candidate can cause a second favorite to be eliminated, which then causes a less-preferred candidate to win in the runoff. Likewise, contingent vote suffers from the center-squeeze effect, which can amplify polarization.

Like any system that elects a single representative, contingent vote is not a form of proportional representation. For that reason, if it were used to elect individual members of a council or legislature, it could be expected to produce the kind of one-party-dominant results that are produced by other single-seat systems like first-past-the-post (FPTP) (plurality). However, election of representatives by only a minority of a district's voters is less likely under contingent vote than under FPTP.

Variants

The supplementary vote and the Sri Lankan contingent vote are two implementation variations, in which voters cannot rank all of the candidates but rather are only permitted to express two or three preferences, respectively.

This means that if a voter's marked preferences do not include either of the candidates who survive to the second round, then it will be impossible to transfer the vote, which is therefore declared "wasted" or "exhausted".

Sri Lankan contingent vote

In Sri Lanka, since the 1982 presidential election, a variant of the contingent vote electoral system is used to elect the country's president. As under the conventional contingent vote, in an election held using the Sri Lankan form of the contingent vote each voter ranks the candidates in order of preference, and if no candidate receives an overall majority of first preference votes on the first count then all but the two leading candidates are eliminated and their votes redistributed to help determine a winner in a second and final round. However, whereas under the ordinary form of the contingent vote voters can rank all of the candidates in order of preference, under Sri Lankan contingent voting the voter can only express their top three preferences (which can lead to exhausted ballots). Each direct presidential election going back to the first in 1981 has seen a candidate from one of the two major parties or alliances at the time winning in the first count so never has the second round of vote counting ever been conducted. [2]

Supplementary vote

Example ballot designs
Two columnSingle column
Supplementary vote two column.svg
Each voter ranks at least one and no more than two candidates by placing an 'X' in one column to indicate their first choice of candidate and another 'X' in a second column to indicate their second choice of candidate.		 Supplementary Vote ballot paper.png
A less common form is to print a single column on the ballot paper and require voters to write '1' next to their first preference and '2' next to their second. [lower-alpha 1]

The supplementary vote (SV) is a variation of the contingent vote in which the voter ranks only two of the candidates in order of preference. If a voter's first-choice candidate is eliminated but their second choice is one of the two remaining candidates, their vote is transferred to the second-choice candidate. This means that the winning candidate has the support of a majority of voters who expressed a preference among the top two, although not necessarily a majority of votes cast in the first count.

The supplementary vote was used in all elections for directly elected mayors in England, including the Mayor of London, and in elections for police and crime commissioners, until 2022, when it was replaced by first-past-the-post voting (FPTP).

History and use

In the early 1990s, the Plant Commission was established by the Labour Party to recommend a new voting system for the Parliament of the United Kingdom. When the Commission reported in 1993, instead of suggesting an already existing system, it recommended the supplementary vote system, which it said had never been used anywhere. In actuality, contingent voting had been in use in Australia as early as 1892. [1]

Although some commentators credit the head of the commission, Raymond Plant, with the invention of SV, according to others, it was the brainchild of a Labour member of Parliament (MP) at the time, Dale Campbell-Savours and academic Patrick Dunleavy, who outlined and advocated for it in an article for the New Statesman magazine that was published September 29, 1989. [3]

In 2000, several districts in England introduced directly elected mayors. It was decided to use the supplementary vote for the election of these new mayors, including the Mayor of London, and for the election of police and crime commissioners across much of England and Wales. [4] The supplementary vote was used for these offices from 2000 to 2022.

In the 2021 London election, a record 5 percent of first preference ballots were rejected, mostly because voters tried to select more than one first preference on a ballot with 20 mayoral candidates divided into two sections. [5] (The 2021 winner did not take a majority of votes counted in the first round (2.5M) but did take a majority of votes that were marked with a preference for either of the two candidates running in the second count.) The Home Secretary, Priti Patel of the Conservative Party, responded by ending the use of the supplementary vote in England in 2022, [6] citing voter confusion with a complex system. However, critics, including the Labour and Green parties, argued that the wasted votes were due to ballot layout and that the change was aimed at benefitting Conservative Party candidates. [7] [8] [9] They also claimed that the supplementary vote was effective in increasing multi-party participation and was popular among voters. [10]

The histories of two-round voting and other forms of instant run-off voting may be seen as part of the history of SV due to their similarities.

Impact on factions and candidates

The supplementary vote is said to encourage candidates to seek support beyond their core base of supporters in order to secure the second preferences of the supporters of other candidates, and so to create a more conciliatory campaigning style among candidates with similar policy platforms. SV is also likely to improve the chances of "third party" candidates by encouraging voters, who wish to do so, to vote sincerely for such candidates for whom, under systems such as first-past-the-post, they would be discouraged from doing so for tactical reasons.

These positive effects are moderated by the incentives SV creates for voting, in some circumstances, for only candidates from among the leading three.

Political scientists Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher noted two flaws of SV: [11]

  • First, since the automatic dual-ballot nature of SV dispenses with any need for a runoff two weeks later – as often happens for, say, the election of the president of France – voters cast their second preferences without being certain of which candidates will make the runoff. Consequently, some second preferences will be declared invalid because they bear only preferences marked for eliminated candidates.
  • Second, it is possible for the victor to fail to achieve an absolute majority overall, for it is not an obligation for a voter to cast a second preference, and even when a second preference is marked, the vote will be ineffective if it is cast for a candidate who does not make it into the top two, when the first preference is marked also for a candidate who does not make it into the second round.

Similar systems

Two-round system

Under the two-round system (also known as runoff voting and the second ballot) voters vote for only a single candidate, rather than ranking candidates in order of preference. As under the contingent vote, if no candidate has an absolute majority in the first round, all but the top two are eliminated and there is a second round. However, in the two round system, voters are asked to return and vote a second time. Because of the similarities between them, the contingent vote and the two-round system can usually be expected to elect the same winner. However, in the two-round system, the voter is permitted to change one's mind from one round to another, even if their favourite candidate in the first round has not been eliminated. It also guarantees that every voter has a chance to express a preference between the top two, unlike the limited forms of contingent vote. Voter turnout may also be higher in the second vote.

Nonpartisan blanket primary

The nonpartisan blanket primary is a variation of the two-round system except the first round does not pick a winner, but instead picks the two highest candidates who will compete in the general election. Because the first round does not pick a winner, there will tend to be higher voter turnout in the second election.

The contingent vote will generally pick the same winner as a blanket primary, except fewer voters in the primary round may lead to a different top-two candidates than if the whole electorate voted in both rounds.

Top-four primary

The top-four primary is a variant of the nonpartisan blanket primary which advances the top four candidates from a single primary, regardless of party, and uses instant-runoff voting in the general election to pick a majority winner.

Instant-runoff voting

As noted above, the instant-runoff voting (or alternative vote) differs from the contingent vote in that it permits several rounds rather than just two. Under the alternative vote only candidate(s) for whom it is mathematically impossible to win are eliminated after each round, and as many rounds occur as are necessary to give one candidate an absolute majority. These differences mean that the contingent vote and alternative vote can produce different results. Because, under the contingent vote, all but two candidates are eliminated in the first round, it is possible for a candidate to be eliminated who would have gone on to win had they been allowed to receive transfers in later rounds.

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ This form was used to elect the Mayor of Newham in the 2006 election.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Two-round system</span> Voting system

The two-round system (TRS), also known as runoff voting, second ballot, or ballotage, is a voting method used to elect a single candidate, where voters cast a single vote for their preferred candidate. It generally ensures a majoritarian result, not a simple-plurality result as under first past the post. Under the two-round election system, the election process usually proceeds to a second round only if in the first round no candidate received an absolute majority of votes cast, or some other lower prescribed percentage. Under the two-round system, usually only the two candidates who received the most votes in the first round, or only those candidates who received above a prescribed proportion of the votes, are candidates in the second round. Other candidates are excluded from the second round.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Single transferable vote</span> Proportional representation ranked voting system

The single transferable vote (STV), sometimes known as proportional ranked choice voting (P-RCV), is a multi-winner electoral system in which each voter casts a single vote in the form of a ranked-choice ballot. Voters have the option to rank candidates, and their vote may be transferred according to alternate preferences if their preferred candidate is eliminated or elected with surplus votes, so that their vote is used to elect someone they prefer over others in the running. STV aims to approach proportional representation based on votes cast in the district where it is used, so that each vote is worth about the same as another. Formally, STV satisfies a fairness criterion known as proportionality for solid coalitions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voting</span> Method to make collective decisions

Voting is a method by which a group, such as a meeting or an electorate, convenes together for the purpose of making a collective decision or expressing an opinion usually following discussions, debates or election campaigns. Democracies elect holders of high office by voting. Residents of a jurisdiction represented by an elected official are called "constituents", and the constituents who choose to cast a ballot for their chosen candidate are called "voters." There are different systems for collecting votes, but while many of the systems used in decision-making can also be used as electoral systems, any which cater to proportional representation can only be used in elections.

Sri Lanka elects on the national level a head of state – the president – and a legislature. Sri Lanka has a multi-party system, with two dominant political parties. All elections are administered by the Election Commission of Sri Lanka.

The Borda count electoral system can be combined with an instant-runoff procedure to create hybrid election methods that are called Nanson method and Baldwin method. Both methods are designed to satisfy the Condorcet criterion, and allow for incomplete ballots and equal rankings.

In single-winner voting system theory, the Condorcet loser criterion (CLC) is a measure for differentiating voting systems. It implies the majority loser criterion but does not imply the Condorcet winner criterion.

Reversal symmetry is a voting system criterion which requires that if candidate A is the unique winner, and each voter's individual preferences are inverted, then A must not be elected. Methods that satisfy reversal symmetry include Borda count, ranked pairs, Kemeny–Young method, and Schulze method. Methods that fail include Bucklin voting, instant-runoff voting and Condorcet methods that fail the Condorcet loser criterion such as Minimax.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a voting method used in single-seat elections with more than two candidates. Instead of voting only for a single candidate, voters in IRV elections can rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice, losing candidates are eliminated, and ballots for losing candidates are redistributed until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an "instant runoff" that allows a comparison of the top two candidates head-to-head.

The exhaustive ballot is a voting system used to elect a single winner. Under the exhaustive ballot the elector casts a single vote for their chosen candidate. However, if no candidate is supported by an overall majority of votes then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and a further round of voting occurs. This process is repeated for as many rounds as necessary until one candidate has a majority.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ranked-choice voting in the United States</span> Electoral system used in some cities and states

Ranked-choice voting (RCV) can refer to one of several ranked voting methods used in some cities and states in the United States. The term is not strictly defined, but most often refers to instant-runoff voting (IRV) or single transferable vote (STV).

Instant-runoff voting (IRV), also known as plurality with elimination or plurality loser, is a ranked-choice voting system that modifies plurality by repeatedly eliminating the last-place winner until only one candidate is left. In the United Kingdom, it is generally called the alternative vote (AV). In the United States, IRV is often referred to as ranked-choice voting (RCV), by way of conflation with ranked voting systems in general.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2009 Burlington mayoral election</span> Election in Vermont

The 2009 Burlington mayoral election was held in March 2009 for the city of Burlington, Vermont. This was the second mayoral election since the city's 2005 change to instant-runoff voting (IRV), after the 2006 mayoral election. In the 2009 election, incumbent Burlington mayor won reelection as a member of the Vermont Progressive Party, defeating Kurt Wright in the final round with 48% of the vote. The election created a controversy over several election pathologies, after Kiss was declared winner as a result of 750 votes cast against his candidacy, over the objections of the 54% of Burlington voters who had preferred Andy Montroll.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral system</span> Method by which voters make a choice between options

An electoral system or voting system is a set of rules that determine how elections and referendums are conducted and how their results are determined. Electoral systems are used in politics to elect governments, while non-political elections may take place in business, non-profit organisations and informal organisations. These rules govern all aspects of the voting process: when elections occur, who is allowed to vote, who can stand as a candidate, how ballots are marked and cast, how the ballots are counted, how votes translate into the election outcome, limits on campaign spending, and other factors that can affect the result. Political electoral systems are defined by constitutions and electoral laws, are typically conducted by election commissions, and can use multiple types of elections for different offices.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ranked voting</span> Family of electoral systems

The term ranked voting, also known as preferential voting or ranked-choice voting, pertains to any voting system where voters indicate a rank to order candidates or options—in a sequence from first, second, third, and onwards—on their ballots. Ranked voting systems vary based on the ballot marking process, how preferences are tabulated and counted, the number of seats available for election, and whether voters are allowed to rank candidates equally.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2017 Greater Manchester mayoral election</span>

The inaugural Greater Manchester mayoral election was held on 4 May 2017 to elect the Mayor of Greater Manchester. The next successive election was due to be held on 7 May 2020, but due to that year's outbreak of the novel Coronavirus, the election was postponed until May 2021. Subsequent elections are legislatively required to be held every four years thereafter. The electoral system used for the election is the supplementary vote (SV).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 Sheffield City Region mayoral election</span> First mayoral election in South Yorkshire

The inaugural Sheffield City Region mayoral election was held on 3 May 2018 to elect the mayor of the Sheffield City Region. The mayor will lead the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. Voting is restricted to the four councils which are constituent members of the combined authority: Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield. Together these councils make up South Yorkshire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">STAR voting</span> Single-winner electoral system

STAR voting is an electoral system for single-seat elections. The name stands for "Score then Automatic Runoff", referring to the fact that this system is a combination of score voting, to pick two finalists with the highest total scores, followed by an "automatic runoff" in which the finalist who is preferred on more ballots wins. It is a type of cardinal voting electoral system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010 Oakland mayoral election</span>

The 2010 Oakland mayoral election was held on November 2, 2010 to elect the mayor of Oakland, California, electing Jean Quan to be their mayor. In early August 2010, incumbent mayor Ron Dellums announced that he would not be seeking reelection to a second term. In November 2010, Oakland also instant-runoff voting to elect its mayor, three city council races and four other local offices, with the elections for the mayor and Oakland council district four requiring multiple rounds of counting. Oakland used instant-runoff voting in the city's remaining elected offices in 2012. IRV was again used in 2014 and 2016, including in the 2014 mayoral election in which incumbent Jean Quan was defeated by Libby Schaaf.

The spare vote is a version of single transferable voting applied to the ranking of parties, first proposed for elections in Germany in 2013. This preferential party system is a ranked proportional representation electoral system applying to political parties instead of individual candidates. The spare vote refers to a secondary vote (preference) of the voter, which only comes into play if the first preference for the political party preferred by the voter, is below the electoral threshold. In Germany, there were draft laws for the spare vote system in Saarland, Schleswig-Holstein and Brandenburg federal states, but they were not implemented.

Ballot exhaustion occurs when a voter's ballot can no longer be counted, because all candidates supported on that ballot have been eliminated from an election. This may occur because the voter chooses not to fill out a complete preference ranking, or because the ballot format itself limits the number of preferences that may be expressed.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Bowler, Shaun; Grofman, Bernard Norman (2000). "The Single Transferable Vote and the Alternative Vote Compared". Elections in Australia, Ireland, and Malta under the Single Transferable Vote: Reflections on an Embedded Institution. University of Michigan Press. p. 40. doi:10.3998/mpub.16507. ISBN   978-0-472-02681-4. The contingent vote … was used in Queensland from 1892 to 1942 and for Democratic primary elections in the U.S. state of Alabama between 1915 and 1931. It has been used for presidential elections in Sri Lanka since 1978 and in 1996 … the United Kingdom … called it the "supplementary vote."
  2. ↑ Gajanayake, Manjula; Siriwardana, Thusitha; Isuranga, Hirantha; Jayasinghe, Pasan (2019). "2019 Sri Lankan Presidential Election: Election Observation Report" (PDF). Centre for Monitoring Election Violence. Retrieved July 21, 2022.
  3. ↑ "Supplementary fudge | Fabian Society". March 21, 2024.
  4. ↑ "Supplementary Voting".
  5. ↑ "London elections 2021: Record number of mayoral votes rejected". May 10, 2021.
  6. ↑ "First Past the Post to be introduced for all local mayoral and police and crime commissioner elections".
  7. ↑ "London mayoral election to be changed to First Past the Post system under Government plans". March 17, 2021.
  8. ↑ "'Make Every Vote Matter' Says Green Party". June 19, 2021.
  9. ↑ "A big change is coming to how we vote for the next Mayor of London". April 7, 2022.
  10. ↑ "Priti Patel under fire over plan to change voting system for London mayor". Independent.co.uk . March 16, 2021.
  11. ↑ Rallings, Colin; Thrasher, Michael; Cowling, David (2002). "Mayoral Referendums and Elections". Local Government Studies. 28 (4): 67–90. doi:10.1080/714004163. S2CID   155007579.
  1. ^ See Electoral Reform Society press release on Torbay election
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.