[EM] Australian voting process

[Forest W Simmons]

As I understand it, voting "above the line" for a party rather than 
ranking the candidates is only a feature of the multi-winner races.

However in the single winner races, it is common for candidates to 
publish "candidate cards" which are how-to-vote recommendations from 
the candidates.  It seems that in these elections the vast majority of 
the voters follow these recommendations.

This practice is one rationale for the various versions of Candidate 
Proxy that have been proposed on this EM list.

In one variant, if a particular preference order can get the same 
number of signatures behind it that is required to get a candidate on 
the ballot, then that order (i.e. ranking of the candidates) can also 
get on the ballot.

In the case of K candidates I suspect that it would be rare to have as 
many as 2K options on the ballot, since most voters would trust the 
judgement of their favorite, and only those that BOTH seriously 
differed with the likely preferences of all of the candidates AND 
thought that these differences were substantial enough to affect the 
outcome, would go to the trouble of trying to get an alternate 
preference order on the ballot.

These ballots would be standard plurality ballots, but some of the 
"names" would be preference orders.  Each voter marks exactly one 
"name."

If you mark a real name, then the candidate whose name you mark acts as 
your proxy; her preference order is assigned to your ballot.  If you 
mark a "name" of the type 
                       "Kerry>Bush>Nader,"
then that order is considered to be your preference order.

Note that this particular option could not even make the ballot without 
there being a substantial fraction of the voters highly concerned about 
what could happen if Kerry preferred Nader over Bush (not too likely).

Once the ballots are in and the candidates decide their orders, then 
the election can be completed by making use of all the preference 
orders in, say, the River method.

Comments?

Forest

RLSuter at aol.com wrote:


>Any thoughts about this article or, more generally, Australia's
>voting system? An interesting difference between it and the
>IRV method that has gained wide support in the U.S. is that
>voters have the option of voting for a single party and letting
>that party allocate their preferences. This was in the L.A.
>Times.
>
>-Ralph Suter
>
>
>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-aussies7oct07,1,5324864.st
>ory?coll=la-headlines-world
>
>
>In Australia, Ranking Process Is Key in a Tight Race
>
>   Voters list candidates by order of preference in a
>   system that's open to minority parties.
>
>By Richard C. Paddock
>Times Staff Writer
>
>October 7, 2004
>
>ADELAIDE, Australia -- When Australians vote Saturday to 
>select members of Parliament and a prime minister, they
>will be  participating in a process that election experts say
>is one of the most democratic in the world.
>
>With Prime Minister John Howard and Labor Party challenger 
>Mark Latham locked in a tight race for the top job, victory
>could well  hinge on an unusual, long-standing feature of
>Australia's electoral  system: the preferential ballot.
>
>Rather than voting for individual candidates for  Parliament,
>voters rank those running in their district in order of preference.
>If  no candidate wins a majority of first-place votes, the
>outcome is  determined by the preferential rankings.
>Members of the Parliament then elect the prime minister.
>
>The system, used in few other places in the world, allows 
>Australians to cast their ballots for minor party candidates
>without necessarily throwing away their votes.
>
>"I think it's the most powerful vote anywhere in the 
>world," said Kevin Evans, an Australian who serves as
>electoral advisor to the United Nations Development
>Program in Indonesia. "It actually  means you can
>vote your conscience, without it helping the party you 
>most dislike."
>
>If the United States had a similar system for presidential 
>voting, minor party candidates such as consumer advocate
>Ralph Nader  could be selected as a first choice -- with
>voters knowing that their  second-place votes would then
>go to the next candidate of their choice,  Democratic Party
>nominee John F. Kerry or Republican President Bush.
>
>"Preferences are more democratic," said Rod Tiffen, a 
>political science professor at the University of Sydney.
>"You could vote for Ralph Nader and have it not be a
>wasted vote."
>
>Australia has long been a leader in election innovations. 
>It began using the secret ballot well before other countries;
>when it was adopted in the United States it was known as
>the "Australian ballot."
>
>Another feature of the electoral system is compulsory 
>voting. By law, all citizens are required to report to their
>polling stations on election day and receive a ballot. How --
>or whether --  they mark the ballot is up to them.
>
>Those who don't go to the polls and cannot provide a 
>legitimate excuse face a fine of about $14.
>
>Many of the nation's parliamentary races are decided by 
>the preferential vote, a system adopted during World War I.
>
>Seeking a fourth three-year term in Saturday's election, 
>Howard, 65, heads a conservative coalition of the Liberal
>Party and  the National Party.
>
>Latham, 43, the Labor Party leader, is attempting to win 
>back power for his party after 8 1/2 years in opposition.
>
>The campaign, limited to just six weeks, has seen a sharp 
>debate on economic issues and a barrage of television ads
>in which Howard accuses Latham of mismanagement while
>serving as a small-town mayor and Latham questions
>Howard's credibility.
>
>Howard is a close ally of Bush and has sent troops to 
>Iraq. Latham has promised to bring most of the 850
>soldiers home by Christmas. In recent weeks, the Iraq
>issue has played a minor role in the campaign.
>
>One effect of the preferential ballot is a flourishing 
>multiparty system that has resulted in the election of
>minor party candidates to Parliament and prompts the
>major parties to reach out to smaller voting blocs in their
>quest for second-place votes.
>
>"I think it works better because it gives small parties a 
>chance," said Sally Giles, 18, a university student who
>will be voting for the first time.
>
>Polls indicate that the election will probably give a big 
>boost to the steadily growing Green Party, which could
>win as much as 12% of the national vote.
>
>In the campaign's final days, Latham has been courting the 
>Green vote by offering a plan to save Tasmania's giant
>old-growth trees, which are being clear-cut and shipped
>to Japan to make paper products.
>
>Howard offered a proposal Wednesday to preserve trees not 
>now slated for logging and emphasized the need to protect
>timber industry jobs.
>
>"If you look at the recent polls we may be ahead ... on 
>the primary vote, but we are getting very few Green
>preferences," Howard said earlier on Australian radio.
>"And if the flow of Green preferences is as solid as is
>forecast in those polls, well, the result could be very
>tight and it could go against us."
>
>Under the preferential selection rules, voters also have 
>the option of voting for a single party and letting that party
>allocate  their preferences. The Green Party has pledged
>its preferences to the Labor Party.
>
>Some Australians grumble about the nation's compulsory 
>voting law, and, in protest, a few refuse to go to the polls.
>
>But most Australians accept their duty, and turnout 
>usually is about 95%.
>
>"Everybody should have to vote," said Robert Capponi, 38, 
>the manager of an Adelaide convenience store.
>
>"Everybody should have an opinion and should voice their 
>opinion."
>----
>Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list 
info
>