Oklahoma primary electoral system

Last updated

The Oklahoma primary electoral system was a voting system used to elect one winner from a pool of candidates using preferential voting. Voters rank candidates in order of preference, and their votes are initially allocated to their first-choice candidate. If, after this initial count, no candidate has a majority of votes cast, a mathematical formula comes into play. The system was used for primary elections in Oklahoma when it was adopted in 1925 [1] until it was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Oklahoma in 1926. [2]

Contents

Method

The prescribed table format in which the results of a vote held using this system should be presented, according to a now-repealed Oklahoma state law. Oklahoma electoral system.jpg
The prescribed table format in which the results of a vote held using this system should be presented, according to a now-repealed Oklahoma state law.

The system is a hybrid between Dowdall voting and Bucklin voting. Voters rank candidates in order of preference. Like in Bucklin voting, voting proceeds in rounds, where the first candidate to reach a majority wins. However, unlike in Bucklin, and like in Dowdall, a second-preference vote is worth half as many points as a first-preference vote; a third-preference is worth a third of a point; and so on. The first candidate whose point totals exceed half the number of voters is declared winner. [3] [1]

As actually implemented in Oklahoma, the system required voters to rank half of all candidates.

Worked example

Election results: 51 votes cast
CandidatePreferenceVotes
AliceFirst choices21
Second choices8 (25)
Third choices7 [27⅓]
BobFirst choices9
Second choices10 (14)
Third choices5 [15⅔]
CarolFirst choices17
Second choices16 (25)
Third choices4 [26⅓]
DaveFirst choices20
Second choices10 (25)
Third choices26 [33⅔]
EmmaFirst choices18
Second choices7 (21.5)
Third choices9 [24½]

In the above example, no candidate has 25.5 points, so we add the second-preference votes: each person's number of second-preference votes is divided by two and added onto their number of first-preference votes. This new total is shown in parentheses.

None of these totals exceeds the majority figure of 26 either, so the third-preference votes are now factored in. Each candidates number of third-preference votes is divided by three and added on, shown in square brackets. At this stage, Alice, Carol, and Dave all have totals in excess of 26, but Dave's total is the highest, so he is the winner despite being ranked first by fewer people than was Alice.

Adoption

The nomination for U.S. Senate of impeached former Governor Jack C. Walton is said to have "frightened" the state "into a system of preferential voting as an escape from minority nominations." In his Senate nomination, Walton received only "an extremely small per cent of the total votes cast," yet was still selected as the Democratic Party candidate, [4] and this perceived injustice led to the Oklahoma Legislature resolving to adopt a different electoral system. However, it was not until the final day of debate on the law that the workings of the system chosen were agreed upon. [5]

The decision to require voters to rank their preferences, which contrasted with most other states' procedures merely giving people the option of doing so (for that matter, only eight states used preferential voting at all), [6] was an attempt to balance the competing concerns of preventing bullet voting (people deciding to list only their first choice) and of not forcing people to give any vote to candidates they found unacceptable. The Oklahoma Senate initially wanted to give second and third preferences equal weight, but the bill was eventually amended to weight them one-half and one-third respectively, it having been decided that this was "the more equitable practice." [5]

Reaction

The initial adoption of what was a highly unusual electoral system caused significant comment in the media and in academia. The law was described as "the most interesting and important primary legislation of the year" by the American Political Science Review , which identified two particular features as particularly intriguing: firstly, the requirement that voters rank a certain number of candidates, and secondly, the "improvement" of giving lower-preference votes less weight: "Here, then, appears to be something new under the sun—compulsory preferential voting for all who take the trouble to come out to the primary!" [7] However, the requirement to rank candidates was also described as "obnoxious" and unfair to people who found only one candidate acceptable. [8] [9]

Voiding

In 1926, the Oklahoma Supreme Court declared the 1925 law "null and void" and ruled that it was unconstitutional to "make it mandatory upon the voter to express a second choice when three or more candidates are running for a given office and a second and third choice when more than four candidates are running for a given office in order to have his vote counted" since such a principle could not "be harmonized with the constitutional guaranties [10] that no power [should] ever interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage." [2] [11] A writ was issued banning elections from being held under the system. [3] Subsequently, Oklahoma's brief stint of preferential voting was analysed as having been "unsatisfactory." [6]

See also

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 a simple 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.

The random ballot, single stochastic vote, or lottery voting is an electoral system in which an election is decided on the basis of a single randomly selected ballot.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jack C. Walton</span> American politician

John Calloway Walton was an American politician and the fifth governor of Oklahoma. He served the shortest term of any Governor of Oklahoma, being the first Governor in the state's history to be removed from office.

Bucklin voting is a class of voting methods that can be used for single-member and multi-member districts. As in highest median rules like the majority judgment, the Bucklin winner will be one of the candidates with the highest median ranking or rating. It is named after its original promoter, the Georgist politician James W. Bucklin of Grand Junction, Colorado, and is also known as the Grand Junction system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1926 Canadian federal election</span>

The 1926 Canadian federal election was held on September 14, 1926, to elect members of the House of Commons of Canada of the 16th Parliament of Canada. The election was called after an event known as the King–Byng affair.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elections in Nauru</span>

Nauru elects on a national level a head of state and a legislature. Parliament has 19 members, elected for a three-year term in multi-seat constituencies. The president is elected for a three-year term by the parliament.

A group voting ticket (GVT) is a shortcut for voters in a preferential voting system, where a voter can indicate support for a list of candidates instead of marking preferences for individual candidates. For multi-member electoral divisions with single transferable voting, a group or party registers a GVT before an election with the electoral commission. When a voter selects a group or party above the line on a ballot paper, their vote is distributed according to the registered GVT for that group.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">May 1924 German federal election</span>

Federal elections were held in Germany on 4 May 1924, after the Reichstag had been dissolved on 13 March. The Social Democratic Party remained the largest party, winning 100 of the 472 seats. Voter turnout was 77.4%.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Optional preferential voting</span> Type of preferential voting system

One of the ways in which ranked voting systems vary is whether an individual vote must express a minimum number of preferences to avoid being considered invalid. Possibilities are:

Preferential voting or preference voting (PV) may refer to different election systems or groups of election systems:

The Borda count is a family of positional voting rules which gives each candidate, for each ballot, a number of points corresponding to the number of candidates ranked lower. In the original variant, the lowest-ranked candidate gets 0 points, the next-lowest gets 1 point, etc., and the highest-ranked candidate gets n − 1 points, where n is the number of candidates. Once all votes have been counted, the option or candidate with the most points is the winner. The Borda count is intended to elect broadly acceptable options or candidates, rather than those preferred by a majority, and so is often described as a consensus-based voting system rather than a majoritarian one.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1925 Seanad election</span>

An election for 19 of the 60 seats in Seanad Éireann, the Senate of the Irish Free State, was held on 17 September 1925. The election was by single transferable vote, with the entire state forming a single 19-seat electoral district.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV), also known as plurality with elimination or sequential loser plurality, 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; however, this use is not widespread outside of North America.

A valence issue is an issue where there is a broad amount of consensus among voters. As valence issues are representative of a goal or quality, voters use valence issues to evaluate a political party’s effectiveness in producing this particular goal or quality.

<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.

Homogeneity is a common property for voting systems. The property is satisfied if, in any election, the result depends only on the proportion of ballots of each possible type. Specifically, if every ballot is replicated the same number of times, then the result should not change.

Comparison of electoral systems is the result of comparative politics for electoral systems. Electoral systems are the rules for conducting elections, a main component of which is the algorithm for determining the winner from the ballots cast. This article discusses methods and results of comparing different electoral systems, both those that elect a unique candidate in a 'single-winner' election and those that elect a group of representatives in a multiwinner election.

Round-robin voting refers to a set of ranked-choice voting systems that elect winners by comparing all candidates to each other in a round-robin tournament. Every candidate is matched up against every other candidate. The method then selects a winner based on the results of these matchups.

References

  1. 1 2 "Chapter 29: Primary Elections". Oklahoma Session Laws. United States: Legislature of Oklahoma: 36–39. 1925.
  2. 1 2 "Dove v Oglesby". United States: Supreme Court of Oklahoma. 16 March 1926. Retrieved 8 May 2011.
  3. 1 2 Cushman, Robert (August 1926). "Public Law in the State Courts in 1925-1926". American Political Science Review . United States: Cambridge University Press. 20 (3): 583–603. doi:10.2307/1945288. ISSN   0003-0554. JSTOR   1945288. S2CID   147418879.
  4. https://www.ok.gov/elections/documents/1922-1926_RESULTS.pdf [ bare URL PDF ]
  5. 1 2 Barth, H A (July 1925). "Oklahoma Adopts Preferential Voting in the Primary". National Municipal Review. United States: National Municipal League. 14 (7): 410–3. doi:10.1002/ncr.4110140707.
  6. 1 2 Overacker, Louise (May 1930). "Direct Primary Legislation in 1928-29". American Political Science Review . United States: Cambridge University Press. 24 (2): 370–380. doi:10.2307/1946656. ISSN   0003-0554. JSTOR   1946656. S2CID   147280464.
  7. P. Orman Ray (May 1926). "Primary Legislation, 1924-1925". American Political Science Review . United States: Cambridge University Press. 20 (2): 350–1. doi:10.2307/1945146. ISSN   0003-0554. JSTOR   1945146. S2CID   147501335.
  8. Luce, Robert (2006). Legislative principles: the history and theory of lawmaking by representative government (2 ed.). Clark, New Jersey, United States: The Lawbook Exchange Ltd. p. 259. ISBN   1-58477-543-2.
  9. Addison, Danny; Palmer, Lisa (2001). The Oklahoma state constitution: a reference guide. United States: Greenwood Press. ISBN   0-313-27507-6.
  10. "Article 1 section 6". Oklahoma Constitution . United States . Retrieved 8 May 2011.
  11. Overacker, Louise (May 1928). "Primary Election Legislation in 1926-27". American Political Science Review . United States: Cambridge University Press. 22 (2): 353–361. doi:10.2307/1945462. ISSN   0003-0554. JSTOR   1945462. S2CID   147673292.