[EM] Order of succession in voting methods

[Michael A. Rouse]

One thing I haven't seen much discussion on (though I might have missed 
it) is order of succession rules for voting methods. Most methods would 
seem to have four possibilities (feel free to add any I've missed):

1. Appointment by a higher authority (President, Governor, Congress, 
what-have-you)
2. Specific and often complicated rules delegating who moves where (like 
the U.S. has with Presidential succession if the VP can't assume office).
3. A separate candidate specifically elected to take over if necessary 
(Vice-President)
4. Special Election

The problem with possibilities 1 and 2 are that the person put in charge 
may not reflect the will of the voters. For example, if the U.S. 
Presidency and the Congress were controlled by different parties, losing 
the President and V.P. could pick a person with a completely different 
viewpoint. (For a time, Newt Gingrich could have become President had 
Bill Clinton and Al Gore been incapacitated).

To a lesser extent, this is true with possibility 3 as well -- many 
people who voted for George Bush Sr. would never have voted for Dan 
Quayle. There is also the problem -- at least in the U.S. system -- of a 
person who has a little authority except breaking ties in the Senate and 
going to funerals of other world leaders (Dick Cheney is a bit of an 
exception, though his role is limited to what the President doesn't want 
to do). He's kind of a spare tire, usually unnecessary except  in an 
emergency.

The problem with possibility 4 is that it would leave the office vacant 
until the election could be held, and there would be added expense and 
inconvenience holding a new election. There is also the problem of 
abbreviated election campaigns and shortened terms of office -- if a 
politician needs to be replaced after he's spent most of his term in 
office, a candidate would  have to spend a bunch of money just to get 
elected, only to have to spend a bunch more almost immediately to be 
re-elected.

Which brings me to my question: In the various election methods being 
proposed, are there some clear, logical ways of choosing a successor if 
the first choice cannot finish his term? Plurality, most Condorcet 
methods, Approval, and IRV would have to use one of the four 
possibilities above -- simply choosing the next highest vote-getter when 
a term is halfway over isn't an option, since the person has not had a 
chance to keep up-to-date with the job, and the person might be a 
completely different party.

The one clever method I've seen is natural extension of "direct 
representation"/proxy voting for a legislature. Voters could explicitly 
state the order of candidates they wanted to receive their proxy, and 
candidates could direct their proxies to another legislator if he died 
or was otherwise incapacitated.  In essence, each legislator would have 
a kind of running mate ready to represent his constituents, and the 
choice of a replacement would most likely be closer to their wishes than 
a political appointee would be. (This would also give another reason to 
be nice to your fellow representatives, because one never knows when 
they might receive a legislative windfall :) ).

Anyway, I'm interested if others have come up with interesting/clever 
methods of insuring a continuation of the government as close to the 
voter's wishes as possible with the different voting methods discussed here.

Michael Rouse
mrouse1 at mrouse.com