[EM] Switzerland, Runoffs, and Multi-Party Systems

[Alex Small]

Adam wrote:
> relevant quote: "The Swiss parliament has two chambers, the National
> Council and  the Council of States. In the National Council, the cantons
> are represented  according to population. In the Council of States, each
> canton has two  representatives, but there are also a few half-cantons
> with one representative  each. For the National Council, there are
> uniform electoral rules for the  country at large; for the Council of
> States, it is up to each canton to  determine the electoral rules as
> long as they are democratic."
>
> So it appears that there is not actually a standard method for electing
> the  council of states members.

I found a few more sources since my last post.

First one is www.kent.ac.uk/politics/researchcentres/csp/cpsgovt.pdf

Relevant quote:  "In the run off elections, necessitated by the use of the
French style two ballot system, the Social Democrats [SPS/PSS] were the
main victors, picking up three seats,"

Although there are no uniform rules, it appears that most of the cantons
have adopted the 2-round runoff system for these particular single-winner
elections.


Next source:  http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Swiss_Council_of_States

Relevant quote:  "41 member of the Council of States are elected at the
same time. The representatives of the cantons of Zug and Graubünden are
elected one year early. In the canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden the
representatives are elected by the general assembly (Landsgemeinde). With
the exception of the Canton of Jura, the representatives are elected by
majority vote. In the canton of Jura, a proportional representation
election system is used."

So it appears that most of them use the 2-ballot system.

What would be interesting is to find out how a canton elects 2 Senators at
the same time with 2-step runoff.  Do candidates decide which of the 2
seats they want to run for?  Do they hold 2 elections in the same year so
that they aren't elected at _exactly_ the same time, but fairly close? 
Maybe they cast 2 votes in the first step?

I suppose you could have a system where in round 1 everybody votes for 2
candidates.  If 2 people get votes from a majority of the voters they're
elected.  If only one gets a majority then you have a runoff between the
top 2 for the other seat, and if nobody gets a majority you have a runoff
between the top 3 where everybody again votes for 2 candidates.  It's easy
to show that in the second round the winners would be guaranteed to have a
majority.

(Yes, I know, many would question the political significance of that
majority, but the mathematical point is clear.)



Alex