Number Of Elections Research Articles

Strategic voting and the borda method

It is more likely that strategic voting will occur when the number of voters is small, such as in a committee, and outcomes more directly affect them. As the number of electors and candidates increases, however, the correct strategy becomes less clear. Opinion polls can indicate preference patterns and voting strength, however, and this can be used by campaign managers to discover the best strategy. It may be expected that they will tell the supporters of their candidate how best to use their votes. Thus, even in situations where there are many voters and more than two candidates, it can be expected that voters will tend to vote strategically because of the activities of political managers. Given this model, voters tend not to vote their preferences, even though it is possible for them to do so. The best outcome which might occur is for the plurality candidate to be elected, as would be the case in a one-vote election. It has been shown, however, that rational action by the voters could result in the second preferred, or least preferred, candidate being elected. In no case was it shown that the best action was to vote one's preference if it is other than the best vote for the first choice and the worst vote for all other candidates. It has not been demonstrated that a rank-preference voting system, such as the one used in the model, will never result in the preferences of the electorate producing the most preferred candidate. What has been demonstrated is that not only will such preference voting systems not always produce this result, but that rational action by voters will not tend to result in the preferences of the electorate being used to determine the most preferred candidate. The implications of this analysis are that remedies for the defects of a single-vote election method based upon preference revelation are not without operational defects themselves. Operationally, they depend upon voters revealing their preferences even if there are incentives to misrepresent them. If the one-vote election method is to be replaced with one that is better able to select the “most preferred” candidate, preference ranking methods may be found operationally wanting.

A ratio measure of interparty competition?

Meltz has proposed a ratio measure of interparty competition, Ω, for two-party electoral systems which he claims is completely general. It is maintained that for very reasonable situations of party competition, the Meltz index does not fall in the [0,1] interval and that it is better interpreted as approximating a standard score. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that: (1) the index actually ranges from [−∞] and (2) the values of the index depend upon the number of elections being considered.

Turnover in State Legislatures

This note reports research on membership turnover in the senates and houses of legislatures in the fifty states. Contemporary rates of turnover are measured, factors that account for variations are identified, and the relative and combined salience of different systemic factors is assessed. Political-system characteristics count less than electoraland legislative-system variables. Of particular significance are political opportunity structures, the number of elections and reapportionments, and levels of compensation.

Electronic Vote Counting in a Metropolitan Area

Jr is a basic requirement of a democracy that in elections each person's vote be counted accurately. Because methods of vote-casting and counting used in the United States have often failed to fulfill this basic obligation of the democratic system, electronic data processing is being introduced into votecounting. The use of such equipment in Hamilton County (Cincinnati), Ohio, has resulted in accurate vote-counting, better record-keeping, and increased public confidence in elections -with only a slight increase in overall election costs. Hamilton County, Ohio, had a 1960 population of 864,121, of whom 502,550 were residing in the central city, Cincinnati. There are 35 other municipalities within the county, plus 12 townships and 25 school districts, in all of which elections are held. Existing election procedures clearly were strained by the area's growth in population and in number of electors, a change of ballot form from party column to office column, burgeoning suburban areas with a consequent increase in the number of municipalities and school districts, a larger number of candidates and of proposals on the ballot, such as tax levies and bond issues, and a growing demand for speed in reporting election results. In Hamilton County, elections take place every year, with county, state, and national offices being filled in even years, and municipal, township, and school district offices in odd years. In even years, there is a countywide primary election in May, as well as a general election in November. In odd years, there are May primaries in a few municipalities. In addition, numerous special elections are held throughout the year. ) Speed and accuracy in the tabulation of election results can be described as essential in the conduct of elections in a modern democracy. Often, local Election Boards, seeking to change out-dated election practices, encounter a number of difficulties, not the least of which is lack of information about the procedures of other jurisdictions, the availability of electronic equipment, the costs of purchasing and maintaining equipment, the training of personnel, etc. The Hamilton County, Ohio Election Board became convinced that a basic change in its procedures was necessary after a recount in 1960 altered the outcome of an important local contest. The Board hoped to avoid major changes in the conditions under which voters go to the polls.

Limitations on the Power of State Legislatures over Presidential Elections

Chancellor Kent went on to predict that if we could successfully elect our Presidents for the next fifty years, our institutions would be recommended to the and of enlightened mankind. His ranking of presidential elections above slavery as a peril to the nation's future and his prediction that the success of our electoral institutions would bring esteem and admiration proved the learned Chancellor to be a poor prophet on both counts. After I73 years of experience, there are still unanswered questions inherent in the United States Constitution's simple directive that . . Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . . .1 In I890, this language caused the Supreme Court to volunteer the dictum that state power over presidential elections is unaffected by anything in the Constitution and laws of the United States )).2 Two years later, in McPherson v. Blacker,3 the Court sustained an act of the Michigan legislature dividing the state into singleelector districts for election of presidential electors. In holding that the fourteenth amendment created no right of popular election of presidential electors and did not freeze the practice of electing them as a unit on a state-wide basis, the Court characterized state legislatures' power as plenary. The right of any legislature to resume appointment of electors itself was expressly confirmed and the Court even suggested that the absolute power of any legislature could not be abdicated by statute or limited by state constitution. Despite the broad sweep of these dicta, the power of state legislatures is not absolute. It is limited by certain provisions of the United States Constitution and by laws passed by Congress within its constitutional powers. State constitutions and the nature of the office of elector itself may also be limitations.

The Operation of the Recall in Oregon

The “final crowning act to complete the temple of popular government here” was the adoption of the “recall” by a constitutional amendment in June, 1908. This provision allows the recall of any elective public officer by the voters of the district from which he was elected. The recall is instituted by filing a petition demanding the recall, signed by twenty-five per cent of the number of electors who voted in the district at the preceding election for justice of the supreme court. The petition must set forth the reasons for the demand. The officer may avoid a recall election by resignation. If he does not resign within five days after the petition has been filed, a special election (in practice it may be called at the same time as the general election) is called to determine whether he shall continue in office. He is virtually a candidate for reëlection without nomination, since others may be nominated for the office, and the person receiving the highest number of votes cast at the election is declared elected, whether he is the person whose recall is demanded or another. No petition may be circulated against an officer until he has held office for six months except in the special case of a member of the legislature, where it may be filed within five days from the beginning of the first session after his election. After one recall election no additional recall petitions may be filed against the same officer during the same term unless the petitioners pay into the public treasury the amount of the expenses of the preceding recall election.

Societies and Academies

Societies and Academies