Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(MA) New voting system proposed...(Run-Off Elections)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Places » Massachusetts Donate to DU
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 02:02 AM
Original message
(MA) New voting system proposed...(Run-Off Elections)
Town Online

State House news: New voting system proposed

Thursday, February 3, 2005

With three special legislative elections in the works, reform advocates are making the case for a new law allowing instant runoff voting in such elections. Instant runoff voting calls for voters to rank candidates by preference. As last-place finishers are dropped and the votes retabulated, a winner endorsed by a majority of voters emerges, rather than a winner approved by a plurality of voters. According to Pamela Wilmot of Common Cause Massachusetts, special legislative elections are a good fit for instant runoff voting because such elections commonly produce low voter turnout, large fields of candidates, and ticket splitting among competing constituencies.

special election contests are scheduled to fill the seats recently vacated by Reps. Thomas Finneran, D-Mattapan, Brian Golden, D-Brighton and Peter Larkin, D-Pittsfield.

<http://www2.townonline.com/wilmington/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=176864>

DU Thread:

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x319173>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. A run-off bill is in the Maine legislature
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Somebody Explain This:
"...rather than a winner approved by a plurality of voters."

Plurality, as in majority of votes?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Plurality defined
Main Entry: plu·ral·i·ty
Pronunciation: plu-'ra-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 a : the state of being plural b : the state of being numerous c : a large number or quantity
2 : PLURALISM 1; also : a benefice held by pluralism
3 a : a number greater than another b : an excess of votes over those cast for an opposing candidate c : a number of votes cast for a candidate in a contest of more than two candidates that is greater than the number cast for any other candidate but not more than half the total votes cast

=====================================

Say there is a race with three candidates. In terms of percentage, they fininsh

1. 40%
2. 35%
3. 25%
=======
100%

Even though #1 failed to get a majority, he/she would win, under the current system, with a plurality.

This system is an alternative. It kicks in when a candidate fails to get a majority. Instead of each voter casting one vote for one candidate, in a 3-way race you would state your first, second and third choice. Preferences would be tabulated, as described in the info above and the Maine article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. So 40% Does Not Constitute a Majority?
Is the threshold for a "majority" a higher percentage?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yes, it can be confusing, stepnw1f . . . as you can see that
.
Yes, it can be confusing, stepnw1f . . . as you can see that an explanation was tried earlier and needs clarification; so let's go directly to an authoritative dictionary . . .

Let's try Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed., 1990, page 1154, (no, it's not online):

Plurality: The excess of the votes cast for one candidate over those cast for any other. Where there are only two candidates, he who receives the greater number of the votes cast is said to have a majority; when there are more than two competitors for the same office, the person who receives the greatest number of votes has a plurality, but he has not a majority unless he receives a greater number of votes than those cast for all his competitors combined, or, in other words, more than one-half of the total number of votes cast. (italicized emphasis in original)






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-05 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Ahhh.... Thank You (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-05 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. A simple majority is 50% + 1
Edited on Tue Feb-08-05 09:04 AM by paineinthearse
Main Entry: ma·jor·i·ty
Pronunciation: m&-'jor-&-tE, -'jär-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 obsolete : the quality or state of being greater
2 a : the age at which full civil rights are accorded b : the status of one who has attained this age
3 a : a number greater than half of a total b : the excess of a majority over the remainder of the total : MARGIN c : the preponderant quantity or share
4 : the group or political party whose votes preponderate
5 : the military office, rank, or commission of a major
- majority adjective

Now here is another term - "super majority". Sometimes a higher number is required for passage. For example in my town, to approve a change to a zoning bylaw a 2/3 vote is required; in the Senate, to call for cloiture, 60/100 votes are required.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-05 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. America is built upon the foundation of "one man, one vote" . . .
Edited on Tue Feb-08-05 12:40 AM by TaleWgnDg
.
America is built upon the constitutional foundation of "one man, one vote." (See Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964)). That is, each voter votes once for one candidate no matter how many candidates are running. If two candidates are running for election then the candidate who receives the majority of the votes wins, or if more than two candidates are running for election then the candidate who receives a majority or a plurality of the votes wins.

However, so-called "instant runoff voting" may afford a single voter more than one vote as well as outcomes not sought. As such "instant runoff voting" may grant a voter more than one vote and may dilute the "one man, one vote" of another voter.

Therefore, plurality or majority results are far preferred as opposed to "instant runoff voting."

(For a definition of "plurality," see post TaleWgnDg's #5 in this DU thread)



edited to add: the Reynolds U.S. Supreme Court case may be read at http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0377_0533_ZS.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » Massachusetts Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC