[EM] Can anyone help with straight-ahead Condorcet language?

[robert bristow-johnson]

> On 09/21/2021 10:42 AM Hahn, Paul <manynote at wustl.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> To expand on this slightly: the language “if more voters rank A above B than rank B above A” might arguably not count a ballot that ranks A but not (explicitly) B toward A’s total against B unless it is spelled out that unranked candidates count as bottom-ranked.
> 

Listen, guys, I **did** all that and posted it a few days back.

So Daniel, I, too, started with the IRV language that was passed by voters in the city but not ratified by the Vermont legislature.  BTW, they took out the mayor's race and the school board races leaving only the city council races.  They did that for shallow political reasons.  I removed the specific offices and made some other terms more generic.

And I also used plurality for the "Condorcet completion method" and, while it's shitty, it was there as a placeholder.  The legal language **must** have something there for that contingency.

So, below, is the language for the IRV that I dressed up slightly to deal with the meaning of the marked ranked ballots (lower ordinals is higher rank) and then I got the modification for BTR, and then **my** stab at the straight-ahead Condorcet method (with plurality as the completion method).  I also have language either allowing or not allowing equal rankings.

And, for political reasons, I am leaving in the language that if there is a majority of first-choice votes, that candidate is elected before going into any retabulation method.

So I have already been at this place.  And I am looking for the best possible language for step (3) in the Condorcet case.  (And the best language for step (4) in the BTR case.  I think my BTR is about as good as it can be, but am happy for any suggestions.)

So thanks, Daniel, but I was already at the place where you are, but with a little more verbose language.  I want this concise, but not too concise. 
 Another quote from Einstein is "A system should be as simple as possible, but no simpler."


Here is Hare RCV (a.k.a. IRV):

___________________________________________________________________________

All elections of [office] shall be by ballot, using a system of ranked-choice voting without a separate runoff election. The presiding election officer shall implement a ranked-choice voting protocol according to these guidelines:
  (1) The ballot shall give voters the option of ranking candidates in order of preference. Lower ordinal preference shall be considered higher rank and the candidate marked as first preference is considered ranked highest. Equal ranking of candidates shall not be allowed. Any candidate not marked with a preference shall be considered as ranked lower than every candidate marked with a preference.
  (2) If a candidate receives a majority (over 50 percent) of first preferences, that candidate is elected.
  (3) If no candidate receives a majority of first preferences, an instant runoff retabulation shall be performed by the presiding election officer. The instant runoff retabulation shall be conducted in sequential rounds. A "continuing candidate" is defined as a candidate that has not been defeated in any previous round. Initially, no candidate is defeated and all candidates begin as continuing candidates.
  (4) In each round, every ballot shall count as a single vote for whichever continuing candidate the voter has ranked highest. The candidate with fewest votes is defeated in the current round.
  (5) The aforementioned instant runoff retabulation, eliminating one candidate each round, shall be repeated until only two candidates remain. The remaining candidate then receiving the greatest number of votes is elected.
  (6) The [governing jurisdiction] may adopt additional regulations consistent with this subsection to implement these standards.
___________________________________________________________________________


Here is Bottom-Two Runoff:

___________________________________________________________________________

All elections of [office] shall be by ballot, using a system of ranked-choice voting without a separate runoff election. The presiding election officer shall implement a ranked-choice voting protocol according to these guidelines:
  (1) The ballot shall give voters the option of ranking candidates in order of preference. Lower ordinal preference shall be considered higher rank and the candidate marked as first preference is considered ranked highest. Equal ranking of candidates shall not be allowed. Any candidate not marked with a preference shall be considered as ranked lower than every candidate marked with a preference.
  (2) If a candidate receives a majority (over 50 percent) of first preferences, that candidate is elected.
  (3) If no candidate receives a majority of first preferences, an instant runoff retabulation shall be performed by the presiding election officer. The instant runoff retabulation shall be conducted in sequential rounds. A "continuing candidate" is defined as a candidate that has not been defeated in any previous round. Initially, no candidate is defeated and all candidates begin as continuing candidates.
  (4) In each round, every ballot shall count as a single vote for whichever continuing candidate the voter has ranked highest. The two candidates with the fewest votes in a round, herein denoted as "A" and "B", shall contend in a runoff in which the candidate, A or B, with lesser voter support shall be defeated in the current round. If the number of ballots ranking A higher than B exceeds the number of ballots ranking B higher than A, then B has lesser voter support, B is defeated, and A continues to the following round. Likewise, if the number of ballots ranking B higher than A exceeds the number of ballots ranking A higher than B, then A has lesser voter support, A is defeated, and B continues to the following round. In the case that the aforementioned measures of voter support of A and B are tied, then the candidate with fewest votes is defeated in the current round.
  (5) The aforementioned instant runoff retabulation, eliminating one candidate each round, shall be repeated until only two candidates remain. The remaining candidate then receiving the greatest number of votes is elected.
  (6) The [governing jurisdiction] may adopt additional regulations consistent with this subsection to implement these standards.
___________________________________________________________________________

If step (4) above can be made better, I would be interested in seeing it.


Here is straight-ahead Condorcet (version 1, most like Daniel's):


___________________________________________________________________________

All elections of [office] shall be by ballot, using a system of ranked-choice voting without a separate runoff election. The presiding election officer shall implement a ranked-choice voting protocol according to these guidelines:
  (1) The ballot shall give voters the option of ranking candidates in order of preference. Lower ordinal preference shall be considered higher rank and the candidate marked as first preference is considered ranked highest. Equal ranking of candidates shall be allowed. Any candidate not marked with a preference shall be considered as ranked lower than every candidate marked with a preference.
  (2) If a candidate receives a majority (over 50 percent) of first preferences, that candidate is elected.
  (3) If no candidate receives a majority of first preferences, a Condorcet-consistent retabulation shall be performed by the presiding election officer. The candidate, who is the Condorcet winner, is elected if the rankings on all of the ballots indicate that this one candidate defeats, with a simple majority of voter preferences, every other candidate when compared in turn with each other individual candidate. A selected candidate defeats another candidate by a simple majority when the number of ballots marked ranking the selected candidate higher than the other candidate exceeds the number of ballots marked to the contrary.
  (4) If no Condorcet winner exists in step (3), then the candidate with the plurality of first preferences is elected.
  (5) The [governing jurisdiction] may adopt additional regulations consistent with this subsection to implement these standards.
___________________________________________________________________________


Here is another straight-ahead Condorcet (version 2):

___________________________________________________________________________

All elections of [office] shall be by ballot, using a system of ranked-choice voting without a separate runoff election. The presiding election officer shall implement a ranked-choice voting protocol according to these guidelines:
  (1) The ballot shall give voters the option of ranking candidates in order of preference. Lower ordinal preference shall be considered higher rank and the candidate marked as first preference is considered ranked highest. Equal ranking of candidates shall be allowed. Any candidate not marked with a preference shall be considered as ranked lower than every candidate marked with a preference.
  (2) If a candidate receives a majority (over 50 percent) of first preferences, that candidate is elected.
  (3) If no candidate receives a majority of first preferences, a Condorcet-consistent retabulation shall be performed by the presiding election officer. The retabulation shall examine each possible pairing of candidates. If N is the number of candidates, including combined Write-In, then the number of possible pairings of candidates is N(N-1)/2. For each possible pairing of candidates, if fewer ballots are marked preferring a selected candidate over the other candidate than the number of ballots marked to the contrary, then the selected candidate is marked as defeated. After all candidate pairs are examined, the candidate who remains unmarked as defeated is the Condorcet winner and is elected.
  (4) If no Condorcet winner exists in step (3), then the candidate with the plurality of first preferences is elected.
  (5) The [governing jurisdiction] may adopt additional regulations consistent with this subsection to implement these standards.
___________________________________________________________________________


In the last two, I want to keep all of the steps the way they are, but if step (3) can be made better, that is what I am groping for.

Concise is good, but it **must** be complete and clear in normal usage of the American English language.


--

r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

.
.
.