The Economist: "Democratic Symmetry"

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

Using the advanced text search on Altavista 

http://www.altavista.com

using

Saari NEAR Borda

produces 17 internet pages.

One of the more interesting real world election method related items was the 
election in Nov. 1998 of Mr. Ventura to be Governor of Minnesota with 37 
percent of the votes (simple plurality used in general election-- as in 
almost all States in the U.S.A. - possible Louisiana exception and others 
(?)).  

One of the last major plurality election winners in U.S. history was Mr. 
Lincoln in 1860 to be U.S. President with circa 40 percent of the popular 
vote thanks to the U.S. Constitution's 12th Amendment.  

One real world result of such minority rule election-- the following horrific 
1861-1865 U.S. Civil War (circa 620,000 dead and multi-thousands maimed for 
life in a then population of around 33 million- circa half women with a high 
percentage of children-- or I estimate around 9-10 percent of all adult men - 
much higher percentages in the Confederate States).  The 12th Amendment 
mindlessly continues in the U.S.A. notwithstanding such minority rule 
election and a potential disaster capable of repetition every 4 years since.

Prof. Saari was not happy about the Ventura election, see-

http://www.newswise.com/articles/1998/11/VOTING.NWU.html

[Excerpt- comments below are Saari's and NOT me- complain about Borda to him 
(or the EM list) and NOT me]

Northwestern University 
6-Nov-98 
Three-way races un-democratic, mathematician [Saari] says
***
CONTACT: 
Donald Saari at 847-491-5580, dsaari at nwu.edu or Bill Burton at (847) 
491-3115 or e-mail at b-burton at nwu.edu 
FOR RELEASE: Immediate 
As Minnesota Prepares For A Pro Wrestler Governor, Northwestern 
Mathematician Says Voting System Is Un-democratic 
EVANSTON, Ill. --- Tuesday's unlikely result of a former pro wrestler 
besting two popular politicians for the governorship of Minnesota may 
not reflect voters' true wishes and is precisely what can happen when 
elections are decided on a simple plurality, a Northwestern University 
mathematician says. 
In a plurality, in which the winning candidate receives more votes than 
any of his or her opponents but less than 50 percent of the votes 
overall, the winner may actually be the last choice of a majority of the 
people, says Donald G. Saari, Pancoe Professor of Mathematics at 
Northwestern, who has written one book on the mathematics of voting and 
is now at work on another. 
"A plurality is un-democratic and unfair," said Saari. "It's the worst 
system anyone could think of for selecting officeholders and can easily 
lead to undesired results." 
On Tuesday, in the race for governor in Minnesota, third party candidate 
Jesse Ventura received 37 percent of the vote to defeat Democrat Hubert 
Humphrey III, the state's attorney general and son of the former U.S. 
vice president; and Republican Norm Coleman, the mayor of St. Paul. 
Humphrey received 28 percent of the vote and Coleman 33 percent. 
Many people who voted for Ventura may have been disaffected voters who 
were out to send a message. A CNN exit poll found that many of Ventura's 
voters would not have voted at all had he not been on the ballot. 
"We have a Bill of Rights that protects us from what has been called the 
'tyranny of the majority' -- what we also need is a voting system to 
protect us from the whim of a mere plurality," Saari said. 
He said more fair election outcomes could be guaranteed if voters could 
cast weighted ballots for their first, second and third choices instead 
of voting for a single candidate. 
"Allowing voters to name only their top choice is akin to ranking 
students based only on the number of As they receive," Saari said. "A 
student with three As and two Fs would be ranked above one with two As 
and three Bs. When elections are decided by a simple plurality, the same 
inequity can occur." 
Using principles adopted from geometry, Saari has demonstrated that in 
most decision-making processes a weighted vote of two for first place, 
one for second and none for third is the most effective means of making 
choices. Such weighted voting was first proposed by the French 
mathematician Jean-Charles Borda in 1770. 
Saari's research has shown that Borda was essentially correct. His goal, 
he said, is to understand which ranking procedures can unintentionally 
lead to inferior choices. The research relates not only to elections, 
but also to business decisions, such as weighing factors in deciding 
where to locate a new plant. 
Saari has shown that the "Borda count" of weighted choices is far more 
reflective of an electorate's wishes than simple plurality voting, and 
more accurate even than a system with run-off elections. 
"Weighted choices would not only ensure that the people's choice is 
elected, but would also help ethnic minority candidates reach office in 
areas in which they are not the majority," Saari said. For legislative 
representatives, he said, minority representation would be further 
helped if there were two or more representatives elected per district.