6: Elections and Electoral Systems Flashcards
definition of single-member district plurality electoral system
plurality majoritarian electoral system
individuals cast a single vote for a candidate in a single-member district
candidate with the most votes wins and the number of votes does not have to be an absolute majority
definition of single non-transferable vote electoral system
plurality majoritarian electoral system
voters cast a single candidate-entered vote in a multi-member district
candidates with the most votes wins
definition of alternative vote electoral system
absolute majority majoritarian system
candidate-entered preference voting system used in single-member districts where voters rank order the candidates
if candidate wins an absolute majority of first-preference votes, they win the election
if no candidate wins an absolute majority, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes is eliminated and votes are reallocated among remaining candidates based on second preferences
repetition of process ^^ until one candidate has the absolute majority of votes (full preferential system) or an absolute majority of the valid votes remaining (optional preferential system)
definition of majority runoff electoral system
voter ranks candidates and candidates win with an absolute majority
if there is no absolute majority, then the top 2 candidates proceed to the next round where all other candidates are excluded
definition of list proportional electoral system
system employed in multi-member districts
seats divided up in districts according to the proportion of votes received by the party
definition of single transferable vote electoral system
voters number a list of candidates in a multi-member system
to gain a seat, candidates need a specific quota of votes - once this is fulfilled, all other voters who voted for that candidate are counted under their second most preferred candidate and so on
if no one initially reaches the quota, the least popular candidate is removed and all voters who chose them as their first choice are counted under their second most preferred candidate
what does the evil example show?
result of the election is determined as much by the preferences of citizens as it is by the voting rule that is being used
whoever controls the choice of the voting method can also control the final voting outcome
voting sincerely does not always lead to a democratic and well-justified outcome
Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem
mathematically equivalent to Arrow’s theorem
no voting system that encourages people to reveal preferences honestly (not always sincere voting)
however, it does not tell us about the impacts of strategic voting on the number of candidates, the nature of political competition, the policies chosen, etc.
Duverger’s law - why can we sustain more than 2 parties under plurality rule?
under plurality rule, there is a tendency to have only two candidates in each district because of strategic voting
e.g. if there are 3 candidates and voters can assess the probabilities of the 3 candidates’ victories, there are strong incentives not to vote for their preferred candidate if that one is strongly lagging behind (even if they initially had a preference for that candidate) - means that one candidate always drops out of the race
Duverger’s hypothesis - why can we sustain a small number of parties under proportional representation?
we should expect anywhere between 2 to (seats per district)+1 candidates
voters only care about who gets elected in a runoff election
e.g. iii there are 4 candidates and voters can assess the probabilities of the candidates’ victories, there are strong incentives to vote firstly for the candidates that are not lagging behind (the 4th candidate), and then by supporting the second-best candidate in the first round since they believe their most preferred candidate has a better chance of winning in the second round
why and how does a more proportional electoral system push political parties to take more extreme policy positions?
under proportional representation, you are better off choosing extremes whereas in a majoritarian system, you are better off staying near the middle
