Proportional Representation
While some reformers believe that campaign finance reform will cure many of the ills of our election process, others feel the key is proportional representation, or other, related reforms.
Proportional representation means electing representatives to our legislatures in proportion to their support in the population. Under our current system of winner-take-all elections in single-member districts, the representative for each district need have no more than 50 percent of the support in that district. Under Proportional Representation, ten one-seat districts might be combined into a single ten-seat district. A party or candidate that receives at least 10 percent of the vote in that district would win a seat.
Proportional Representation is likely to increase voter turnout. Turnout for the 1996 presidential election was 49 percent. Voter turnout is generally estimated to be 10-12 percent higher in nations with PR than in similar nations using winner-take-all elections. Thirty of the of the 36 countries rated "free" by the human rights organization Freedom House use proportional representation to elect their most powerful legislature.
Some other popular reforms are related to straightforward proportional representation in that they tend to allow representation for minority groups or opinions within the population, but differ in the details.
"Preference voting" characterizes Cambridge MA's proportional representation system as well as Australia's instant run-off voting. Voters are asked to rank candidates in order of preference.
Cumulative voting has been used in at large elections (Amarillo, Texas) or within three-seat districts (Illinois). In cumulative voting, voters may cast more than one vote, and they are allowed to "cumulate" their votes, or give all or part of them to a single candidate. In systems where voters have multiple ballots, but are not allowed to cumulate them, there is a smaller chance that ethnic or ideological minorities will get elected.
RULES:
- Cumulative Voting - Amarillo, TX
In Amarillo's cumulative voting system, each voter has the same number of votes as there are seats. The elections are still at large, but the voter has the right to cast as many of their ballots for each candidate as they wish. For instance, if there are four seats, a voter may cast all four of their votes for a single candidate, split their vote among two or three contenders, or cast a single vote for each of four different candidates. More...
- Proportional Representation - Cambridge, MA
Cambridge's nine City Councillors and six School Committee members are elected at large by Proportional Representation (PR) for a two year term. Any partly or candidate receiving more than 10 percent of the vote can obtain at least one seat on the Council.Voters may vote for as many candidates as they wish, but they must indicate the order of their preference among the candidates. More...
- Cumulative Voting - Illinois
The state of Illinois had a semi-proportional voting system to elect the lower House from 1870 to 1980. Voters had three votes but had the option to give all three votes to one candidate. Voters got rid of the system in 1980, partly to save money and partly in response to the slogan "Fire 59 lousy politicians with one shot." The house shrank from 177 seats to 118 and simple majority voting became the rule. A constitutional amendment piece of legislation was introduced in 2005 to restore the old system. More...
- Instant Run-offs
While proportional representation is a system for electing legislatures, Instant runoff voting can be used for elections of a single, executive position. Instant runoff voting (IRV) eliminates the "wasted vote" or "spoiler" effects of third-party candidates in such elections. Voters rank candidates in order of choice: 1,2,3 and so on. If no candidate wins a majority (more than 50%) of first-choice votes, the last-place candidate is eliminated. Ballots cast for that candidate are redistributed to each voter's next choice. This process of elimination occurs until a candidate wins majority support. The City of San Francisco adopted IRV in 2002. States that might adopt IRV in the future include Alaska, California, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Texas and Vermont. More...
- States' Choice of Voting Systems Act - Federal
A nice example of a Federal legislative initiative giving states the right to establish innovative voting systems. It was offered in 1999. More...
More:
|
 |
|
e-Mail this page to a Friend!