Countback

Last updated

The countback method is a way of filling casual vacancies in proportional voting systems. Casual vacancies are filled by re-examining the ballots from the previous election. The candidate who held the seat is eliminated, and the election is then re-run with this candidate removed. Unlike other methods of filling vacancies, this procedure maintains proportional representation, and eliminates the need for expensive and low-turnout special elections.

Contents

Uses

Countbacks are used in Malta, [1] the Australian Capital Territory, [2] Tasmania, [3] [4] Victoria, [5] and Western Australia, [6] and for some local councils in New South Wales. [7]

Problems

Caused by STV

Countries often attempt to use countbacks with ranked-choice voting or STV-PR, which often causes major problems and complications, because STV does not pass local independence of irrelevant alternatives (LIIA). This means the results can respond chaotically to the removal of a winning candidate. For example, a second-place finisher could become the last-place finisher under a full STV recount, meaning a politician might lose their seat because of a colleague's death or resignation. Most jurisdictions that use STV countbacks avoid this by "resuming" the STV process in the final stage, taking votes originally allocated to the elected candidate and transferring them to any unsuccessful candidates. However, the procedure for this can quickly become complex and highly arbitrary, with the outcome depending strongly on minor variants in counting rules (e.g. which candidates are considered "eliminated" in each round). This procedure also inserts spoiler effects into the race, allowing the final result to depend on the order in which vacancies arise, and potentially excluding popular candidates from contention because they were eliminated in early rounds.

For rules that do pass LIIA (such as ranked pairs or most rated voting rules), countbacks are trivial, because excluding the original winner causes the runner-up to take their place. Such rules therefore permit low-cost countbacks and allow jurisdictions to fully eliminate by-elections.

A further problem is that the number of exhausted ballots in STV elections increases every time a candidate is removed from contention. It is therefore possible that the replacement will be elected with only a handful of votes, substantially less than a full quota. If this fraction is particularly small, and thus no similar candidates remain on the ballot, election rules may call for a different method of filling the vacancy to be used.[ citation needed ]

Insufficient candidates

Although the countback method is designed to select a replacement representing the same group of voters who elected the original candidate, it remains possible that no similar candidates remain on the ballot. In 1985 the Tasmanian Parliament amended the Electoral Act to allow true by-elections if no candidates of the same party as the outgoing representative remained on the ballot. In this circumstance, the party may request that a by-election be held. However, this has not happened because most political parties and community groups now nominate a surplus number of candidates, in order to ensure they can fill any casual vacancies.[ citation needed ]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proportional representation</span> Voting system that makes outcomes proportional to vote totals

Proportional representation (PR) refers to any type of electoral system under which subgroups of an electorate are reflected proportionately in the elected body. The concept applies mainly to political divisions among voters. The essence of such systems is that all votes cast – or almost all votes cast – contribute to the result and are effectively used to help elect someone. Under other election systems, a bare plurality or a scant majority are all that are used to elect candidates. PR systems provide balanced representation to different factions, reflecting how votes are cast.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Single transferable vote</span> Multi-winner electoral system

The single transferable vote (STV), a type of proportional ranked choice voting, 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 alternative 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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Droop quota</span> Quantity of votes in election studies

In the study of electoral systems, the Droop quota is the minimum number of supporters a party or candidate needs to receive in a district to guarantee they will win at least one seat in a legislature.

Electoral systems of the Australian states and territories are broadly similar to the electoral system used in federal elections in Australia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tasmanian House of Assembly</span> Lower house of the Parliament of Tasmania

The House of Assembly, or Lower House, is one of the two chambers of the Parliament of Tasmania in Australia. The other is the Legislative Council or Upper House. It sits in Parliament House in the state capital, Hobart.

In the Parliament of Australia, a casual vacancy arises when a member of either the Senate or the House of Representatives:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Donkey vote</span> Type of cast ballot in ranked voting in which candidates are ranked in order of appearance

In electoral systems which use ranked voting, a donkey vote is a cast ballot where the voter ranks the candidates based on the order they appear on the ballot itself. The voter that votes in this manner is referred to as a donkey voter.

BC-STV is the proposed voting system recommended by the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in October 2004 for use in British Columbia, and belongs to the single transferable vote family of voting systems. BC-STV was supported by a majority of the voters in a referendum held in 2005 but the government had legislated that it would not be bound by any vote lower than 60 percent in favour. Because of the strong majority support for BC-STV, the government elected to stage a second referendum in 2009, but with increased public funding for information campaigns to better inform the electorate about the differences between the existing and proposed systems. The leadership of both the "yes" side and the "no" side were assigned by the government. The proposal was rejected with 60.9 percent voting against, vs. 39.1 percent in favour, in the 2009 vote.

The single transferable vote (STV) is a proportional representation system that elects multiple winners. It is one of several ways of choosing winners from ballots that rank candidates by preference. Under STV, an elector's vote is initially allocated to their first-ranked candidate. Candidates are elected (winners) if their vote tally reaches quota. After the winners in the first count are determined, if seats are still open, surplus votes — those in excess of an electoral quota— are transferred from winners to the remaining candidates (hopefuls) according to the surplus ballots' next usable back-up preference.

CPO-STV, or the Comparison of Pairs of Outcomes by the Single Transferable Vote, is a ranked voting system designed to achieve proportional representation. It is a more sophisticated variant of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system, designed to overcome some of that system's perceived shortcomings. It does this by incorporating some of the features of Condorcet's method, a voting system designed for single-winner elections, into STV. As in other forms of STV, in a CPO-STV election more than one candidate is elected and voters must rank candidates in order of preference. As of February 2021, it has not been used for a public election.

Historically, the single transferable vote (STV) electoral system has seen a series of relatively modest periods of usage and disusage throughout the world; however, today it is seeing increasing popularity and proposed implementation as a method of proportional representation and a goal of electoral reform. STV has been used in many different local, regional and national electoral systems, as well as in various other types of bodies, around the world.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a ranked voting method used in single-winner elections. IRV is also known outside the US as the alternative vote (AV). Today it is in use at a national level to elect the Australian House of Representatives, the National Parliament of Papua New Guinea, the President of Ireland and President of India. In Australia it is also used for elections to the legislative assemblies of all states and territories except Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory, and for the Tasmanian Legislative Council.

There are a number of complications and issues surrounding the application and use of single transferable vote proportional representation that form the basis of discussions between its advocates and detractors.

In politics, a casual vacancy is a situation in which a seat in a deliberative assembly becomes vacant during that assembly's term. Casual vacancies may arise through the death, resignation or disqualification of the sitting member, or for other reasons.

The Wright system is a refinement of rules associated with proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote (PR-STV) electoral system. It was developed and written by Anthony van der Craats, a system analyst and life member of the Proportional Representation Society of Australia. It is described in a submission into a parliamentary review of the 2007 Australian federal election.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV), also known as ranked-choice voting (RCV), preferential voting (PV), or the alternative vote (AV), is a multi-round elimination method where the loser of each round is determined by the first-past-the-post method. In academic contexts, the term instant-runoff voting is generally preferred as it does not run the risk of conflating the method with methods of ranked voting in general.

Proportional Representation Society of Australia Inc. is an electoral reform organisation in Australia. Its membership includes people that have successfully promoted electoral reform.

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

An electoral or voting system is a set of rules used to determine the results of an election. 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.

Nicholas Adam Street is an Australian politician. He was elected to the Tasmanian House of Assembly in a countback conducted on 1 March 2016, to fill a vacancy caused by the resignation of Paul Harriss, and served until his defeat at the 2018 state election. He was then re-elected on 6 February 2020, filling a vacancy caused by the resignation of Will Hodgman.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hare–Clark electoral system</span> Proportional-representation voting system

Hare-Clark is a type of single transferable vote electoral system of proportional representation used for elections in Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. The method for the distribution of preferences is similar to other voting systems in Australia, such as for the Australian Senate.

References

  1. Bonnici, Julian (23 March 2022). "How Malta's Voting System Works: A Guide To The General Election". Lovin Malta. 9. What is a casual election?. Archived from the original on 31 July 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024.
  2. "Hare-Clark electoral system". Elections ACT . 10 July 2024. Filling casual vacancies. Archived from the original on 31 July 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024. Only unsuccessful candidates who contested the original election and who choose to contest the casual vacancy can be elected in a 'casual vacancy countback'.
  3. "Local government vacancies since the 2022 elections". Tasmanian Electoral Commission . Recounts. Archived from the original on 31 July 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024.
  4. "House of Assembly elections". Tasmanian Electoral Commission. Previous Elections. Archived from the original on 31 July 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024.
  5. "Council countbacks and by-elections". Victorian Electoral Commission . Countback. Archived from the original on 31 July 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024.
  6. Bowe, William (31 January 2023). "The spoils of defeat". The Poll Bludger. Archived from the original on 31 July 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024. On the other side of the aisle, Labor is negotiating a less consequential but electorally noteworthy difficulty arising from the retirement of high-profile former minister Alannah MacTiernan and the resulting vacancy for her South West region upper house seat. Such vacancies are filled through a countback of ballot papers from the previous election and not with the favoured nominee of the party, as in the Senate. The top three of Labor's six candidates on the South West ticket were elected in 2021, and in the normal course of events the countback would elect the next candidate along. However, The West Australian reports the candidate in question, John Mondy, is 'understood to be reluctant' to tear himself away from a successful Bunbury signwriting business to spend two years as a parliamentarian.
  7. "Countback elections". NSW Electoral Commission . Councils using countback elections. Archived from the original on 21 May 2024. Retrieved 31 July 2024.