Electoral Systems – General

The following description is copied from the BC Citizens’ Assembly: Fact Sheet #6 – Understanding Electoral Systems

Understanding Electoral Systems

Democratic Electoral Systems

How do we start thinking about elections? At one level they are deceptively simple:  Politicians compete for public support.  Voters respond on election day by indicating who they prefer.  The votes are tallied and translated into seats in the Legislature.  And the electoral system organizes, shapes and governs the process.

The electoral system determines the “exchange rate” between votes and seats — that is, how votes are translated into seats.  How many and what kind of votes are needed to get a seat varies from system to system.  As a result, different electoral systems give politicians incentives to organize and campaign in different ways.  Some electoral systems may even create barriers for certain types of candidates.  Different electoral systems give voters different kinds of choices, which can then affect the decisions voters make.

So while electoral systems may appear simple, upon closer examination they can differ in a multitude of ways, with decidedly different effects.  Electoral systems are fraught with subtleties and complexities.

Characteristics of electoral systems

To understand electoral systems, three basic dimensions must be considered:

  • District Magnitude
  • Ballot Structure
  • Electoral Formula

District Magnitude (DM)

District Magnitude refers to the number of representatives chosen from an electoral district.

  • DM may range from one (i.e. one member is elected from a constituency) to the total number of seats (i.e. the entire province or country is one constituency).
  • Proportional systems require some districts with more than one representative.
  • The limit to how proportional a system can be is determined by the district magnitude – increasing DM size will increase the potential for proportionality.
  • There is no need for district magnitudes to be the same in every electoral district.
  • The “personal connection” between voter and representative is likely to shift as the number of representatives from an area changes

Ballot structure

Ballot Structure simply refers to the kinds of choices voters can make on the ballot paper when they go to vote.  The range of choices includes:

  • Marking a single choice for a party or candidate
  • Indicating a set of preferences.
  • Weighting choices by ranking candidates.

The structure of the ballot can:

  • Influence the balance of control between the parties and the voters, with respect to who actually gets elected as a representative.
  • Influence internal party decision-making with respect to nominations – closed list systems give the party “list makers” significant power.
  • Control the nomination process, especially if it effectively determines election prospects, can affect the nature and strength of party discipline in the legislature.

Electoral formula

The Electoral Formula determines how votes are turned into seats given the District Magnitude and the Ballot Structure.  It incorporates the mathematics and procedures for determining how many votes are required for election, and just who gets elected.  It may also specify some kind of minimum electoral success – or “threshold” – before a party can gain any representation.  While electoral formulas vary widely, they tend to be grouped by three basic principles:

  • Plurality
  • Majority
  • Proportional Representation

Questions to Consider

  • If elections are a contest, who are the contestants?  Political parties or candidates?
  • Do you want a proportional system?  If so, how proportional must it be?
  • Do you want to provide for local representation?  If so, how big should the area represented be?  How many representatives should it have?
  • What kind of choices should voters have on their ballots?
  • How important is it that the mechanics of the systems be simple and transparent?

The following description is copied from the BC Citizens’ Assembly: Fact Sheet #7 – Electoral Systems

Electoral Systems

Families of electoral systems

There are five types – or families – of electoral systems used in democracies around the world:

  • Majority systems
  • Plurality systems
  • Proportional representation list systems
  • Proportional representation by single transferable vote systems
  • Mixed systems

Majority systems

The fundamental principle of majority systems is that the winning candidate must obtain more than 50 per cent of the vote. This may mean, when there are more than two candidates, some process is required for eliminating the least popular candidates and redistributing their votes to the remaining candidates to ensure an overall majority is achieved. This could be done either:

  • Through a second round of voting – or run-off election – or
  • Through a system where voters rank candidates on the ballot in order of preference –sometimes called an alternative vote

Plurality systems

British Columbia’s current electoral system is a plurality system – the system now in use throughout Canada, both federally and provincially.

In plurality systems, individual candidates seek election in their electoral district and the winning candidate in each district is the one with the most votes – even if they get less than 50 per cent of voter support. This can result in such anomalies as a party achieving enough seats to form a majority government with less of the popular vote than the opposition party – as happened in BC in 1996.

Proportional representation systems (PR)

Proportional representation (PR) systems vary widely but all are designed to ensure that the range of opinion in the legislature reflects the range of opinion in the electorate. These systems distribute seats in proportion to the share of the vote received by each party or candidate.

There are two major types of proportional representation systems:

  • PR-List systems
  • PR by the single transferable vote (PR-STV)
Proportional representation list systems (PR-List)

In PR-List systems, each party offers voters a list of candidates for election and voters select between party lists.

Lists can be either “closed” or “open.” If the lists are closed, candidates are elected in the order set out by the party. So candidates listed at the bottom of the list are less likely to be elected

than those at the top. If the lists are open, voters can indicate which candidate(s) they prefer on the party list.

Proportional representation by single transferable vote systems (PR-STV)

PR-STV is also designed to create a representative assembly that mirrors voter support. However, in contrast to PR-List systems which reflect support for political parties, PR-STV is based on voters indicating their preferences for individual candidates.

PR-STV systems ask voters to rank candidates on the ballot (which is called a preferential ballot). This allows voters to choose between candidates for the same party or from different parties.

Mixed systems

In some ways it is misleading to call mixed systems a distinct ‘family’ of electoral systems. As the name implies, these systems mix two (or more) different systems in an attempt to obtain the advantages of the different systems while minimizing their disadvantages.

The most widely used mixed systems attempt to balance two key principles that are often seen as mutually exclusive:

  • Identifiable local representatives
  • Some measure of proportionality

While there are many ways in which systems can be mixed, the possibilities include:

  • Using different systems in different regions
  • Using a mix of systems across the country
  • Using different systems to elect different levels of government

The following description is copied from the BC Citizens’ Assembly: Fact Sheet #13 – Implications of Electoral Systems

Implications of Electoral Systems

Every electoral system is structured differently and, as a result, each produces different results.  Depending on your perspective, these results can be seen as either positive or negative.  Yet it would be fair to say that each system has both positive and negative implications.  In thinking about electoral systems, we need to keep in mind these implications and think about the “trade-offs.”

Majority Systems

  • Regularly produce one-party majority governments, or coalition governments.
  • Identifiable local representative is chosen in and for each area.
  • Limit the representation of minor political parties but reduce the significance of “wasted” votes for these parties by enabling their supporters to contribute to the choice of large party candidates.
  • Governments and members are accountable through a direct electoral contest.
  • Allow the governing party or coalition to dominate parliament.
  • Distort the vote/seat relationship; there is no obvious, predictable connection between the two except that there is usually a large bonus in seat-share to the party with the most primary votes.
  • No representation for minority interests – unless these are geographically concentrated.
  • Provides a mechanism for eliminating candidates and redistributing voter support – so a majority winner can be achieved:
    • Under the second ballot, two election periods are required.
    • Ballot format for alternative vote (AV) is more complex than for a categorical choice.
    • Generally, voters for minor-party candidates have a second chance to have their preferences counted; but not those who vote for the largest parties.
    • Even though the second preferences of minor-party voters may count in the selection of winning candidates, votes do not count equally in electing members, and many votes – those cast for losing candidates – do not contribute to electing anyone.

Plurality Systems

  • Regularly produce stable one-party majority governments able to easily dominate parliament.
  • Identifiable local representatives are chosen in and for each area
    Limit the proliferation of minor political parties.
  • Governments and members are accountable through simple electoral contests.
  • Systems are easy to use an to understand; voters have a simple either-or choice, often between two major parties.
  • Systems are familiar; we know how they work in our society.
  • Distort the vote–seat relationship so there is no obvious, predictable connection between the two.
  • Minority interests and small voices often get shut out.
  • Votes do not count equally in electing MLAs; many votes do not contribute to electing anyone.

Proportional Representation List (PR-List)

  • Party representation in the legislature is determined by voters; the distribution of seats more closely reflects voter support for parties.
  • Minority voices are heard in parliament.
  • Almost all votes contribute to electing legislators.
  • Strengthen the role of parliament in choosing and checking the government.
  • Voter turnout tends to be slightly higher.
  • Do not produce identifiable one-party governments, so electoral accountability is reduced.
  • Do not provide identifiable local representative.
  • Individual politicians cannot easily be held accountable by voters.

Proportional Representation by the Single Transferable Vote (PR-STV)

  • Produces a close match between a party’s seat share and its vote share – but this varies with district magnitude.
  • Gives the voter the opportunity to vote for individual candidates as well as for parties, and the opportunity to choose among candidates from the same party or from different parties.
  • Permits candidates to be elected who appeal to a particular constituency.
  • Does not discriminate against independent candidates.
  • Requires a preferential ballot which is more complicated for voters.
  • Does not have single, geographically-defined, local members
    Is more likely to produce coalition governments.
  • May encourage regional and/or sectional politics and/or brokerage politics rather than politics based on province-wide issues.
  • Has the potential to weaken party control of candidates and MLAs

Mixed Systems

Mixed systems are, by definition, various combinations of other electoral system families.  As a result, the implications of any one mixed system are the implications of its component systems.  Because the systems are mixed, these implications can interact in sometimes unpredictable ways.  The most widely used mixed systems attempt to balance local representation and some measure of proportionality.

  • Proportional representation systems generally increase the number of parties and the possibility of coalition government.
  • Some mixed systems create two types of members of the legislature: constituency members responsible to the electorate and list members who owe their position to the party list makers and have no constituency responsibilities.
  • Creating two types of members can create two types of parties: large ones that do the constituency work and small ones that promote particular issues.