Democracy, Elections & Electoral Systems

This week 1.Democracy 2.Electoral systems

Democracy

Democracy: A very broad definition Demos + kratia Ensuring legitimate decisions Translating people’s desires into decisions directly (referendum, participatory democracy) indirectly (representation) Participation: from limited to extensive Early democracies Ancient Athens Roman Republic Any small-village council Women not involved

Modern democracy 1: Mostly representative Voters are represented Election of legislature & executive Gradual extension of suffrage Political parties & multipartism Majority rule but… a liberal democracy leaders & majorities are constrained individuals & minorities are given (some) protection

Modern democracy 2: Some direct democracy, too Referendum Used in democratic countries Vote on a specific question Decision usually accepted by leaders A.k.a. ballot initiatives, propositions Participatory democracy Used infrequently Citizens themselves deliberate Consensus or majority Used on small scale (city, village, town)

Electoral systems (a.k.a. voting systems) NB: this is about the election of the lower house of parliaments Images in this section are taken from Douglas J. Amy. Douglas J. AmyDouglas J. Amy

Why bother with elections & electoral systems? Procedure to elect representatives to legislature Translating votes into seats A balance of 1.Stability & effectiveness 2.With the representation of different values & interests

Why the debate about the voting system? People not adequately represented Voter cynicism/discontent/apathy Making democracy more substantive A possible response: reforming the electoral system

Different ways of distributing seats A country with a parliament of 50 seats District = riding 50 seats Entire country is a PR district Used in SMP Used in PR systems

System 1: Single member plurality (SMP) A.k.a. first-past-the-post 1 seat per riding 1 vote per person Encourages bipartism (plus small third parties) Encourages centrist government  political parties target “median voter” Median voter = person in the middle

Advantages Simplicity Stable majorities, seldom minority governments Strong government in parliamentary system Coherence of political programme & policies For the Ontario election of October 6, 2011, if you lived in the Ottawa-Centre riding, your ballot looked something like this.

Disadvantages 4 parties’ results in one riding Winner of the seat with just 35% of the vote. This is called: - a relative majority - or a plurality % votes and % seats disproportionate Weak representation (see chart & next slide) Regional fragmentation if concentration of voters Much power in the hands of majority Limited choice if dissatisfied with current gov. Illusion of broad support (click here)here Weak mandate (according to critics)according to critics

Ex.: Votes in the May 2, 2011, Canadian federal election Eligible voters (people who had the right to vote) People who actually voted on May 2, 2011 People who voted for Conservative Party candidates (40% of those who voted, but 24% of all eligible voters)

System 2: Proportional representation (PR) A family of systems Several seats per riding 1 vote per person Approximation of % votes and % seats Different methods of seat distribution More parties can win seats

How to cast a PR vote Closed party list ballot Voter chooses party Candidates are elected in order of appearance if more than one is elected Open party list ballot Voter chooses preferred candidate in one party Candidates and parties with most votes get elected Ex.: A riding with 5 seats to be allocated Type 1 Type 2

Distribution of seats in PR (using the largest remainder method ) Five parties receive the following popular vote in a 10-seat riding Republican 38,000 Democrat 23,000 Reform 21,000 Green 12,000 Independent 6,000 Total popular vote 100,000 Number of votes required to obtain 1 seat Quota = Total popular vote expressed ÷ Number of seats = 100,000 ÷ 10 = 10,000 10,000 votes give a party 1 seat Republican: 38,000  3 seats  remainder = 8,000  1 more seat = 4 Democrat: 23,000  2 seats  remainder = 3,000 = 2 Reform: 21,000  2 seats  remainder = 1,000 = 2 Green: 12,000  1 seats  remainder = 2,000 = 1 Independent: 6,000  0 seat  remainder = 6,000  1 seat = 1 Seats allocated 8 Seats left to allocate 2 2 largest remainders get 1 seat each

Advantages “Getting what you vote for” Voting for parties or for candidates Better representation: cross-section of the population Ways to affect degree of proportionality ridings with many seats: more proportional ridings with few seats: less proportional setting minimum % of votes to participate in distribution

Disadvantages Harder to understand at first Possibility of instability (depending on number of parties in the house) Negotiations between party leaders & coalitions Coalition compromise may be different from election platform Can encourage radical parties (depending on degree of proportionality)

System 3: Mixed member proportional (MMP) Combines SMP & PR 2 votes per person 1 for SMP riding 1 for PR riding Seats in parliament elected with SMP & PR: Germany: 50% SMP, 50% PR Italy: 75% SMP, 25% PR New Zealand: 60% SMP, 40% PR proposed for Ontario in 2007: 70% SMP, 30% PR Proportionality is influenced by the mix of SMP & PR seats SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding SMP riding PR riding with 10 seats

How to cast a MMP vote Single member plurality Proportional Real German ballot

Advantages & disadvantages Better representation than SMP Contact between voter & individual candidates is preserved (SMP) Choice of party, too (PR) Stability of coalitions SMP & PR component can be tweaked Less encouragement to radical parties than PR only Can be complex follow more candidates & more

System 4: Single transferable vote (STV) A.k.a. preferential voting, a.k.a. choice voting Several seats per riding 1 vote per person Voters indicate order of preference

How to cast a STV ballot 2 types of STV ballots Ballot Douglas Campbell – Dem. Martha Dains – Rep. Terry Graybeal – Reform Robert Gomez – Dem. Cynthia Daniels – Indep. Robert Higgins – Rep. Indicate your 1 st, 2 nd, 3 rd, 4 th, 5 th and 6 th choices Type 1 Type 2

Distribution of the seats in STV: calculating the threshold for 1 seat Characteristics of the riding There are 3 seats to fill There are 6 candidates running Calculation of the threshold (or quota) required to get one seat Threshold = [Votes cast ÷ (number of seats + 1)] + 1 = [10,000 ÷ (3 + 1)] + 1 = (10,000 ÷ 4 ) + 1 = 2,501 2,501 To get 1 seat a candidate needs 2,501 votes Six candidates receive the following popular vote Douglas Campbell: 400 Martha Dains: 2,300 Terry Graybeal: 2,000 Robert Gomez: 2,900 Cynthia Daniels: 1,800 Robert Higgins: 600 Total popular vote:10,0000 This formula is called the Droop quota*

2,501 votes = 2,501 votes

Distribution of the seats in STV Threshold = 2,501 votes

Advantages Few unused/wasted votes Voters indicate where a wasted vote goes Contact between voter and individual candidates is preserved Improves representation Stable majorities

Disadvantages Hard to explain Need to know about all the candidates & their parties If there are too many seats & too many candidates voters can’t rank all the candidates Random ranking beyond a certain point (“Donkey voting”)

Conclusion Close association between democracy & election Elections allow to choose representatives Voting systems use different methods to translate votes into seats balance stability & representation affect # of parties & views represented