[EL] "How to Keep Extremists Out of Power"
Dan Meek
dan at meek.net
Sun Feb 28 02:23:28 PST 2021
STAR Voting (Score Then Automatic Runoff) is a method of RCV that does
not "drop the candidate with the fewest first place votes (or first
place + reallocated votes) after each round." See
https://www.starvoting.us.
Instead, the first round consists of totalling each candidate's "score,"
based upon the 0 to 5 rating from each voter. In a single-member
district, round 2 takes the top two scorers and evaluates them only
against each other to produce the winner: Which of the 2 was preferred
by more voters than the other way around? If a voter assigned both of
them the same score, that is not counted as a vote for either.
STAR Voting can also determine winners in multi-member districts. In
brief, the method determines the first winner in the same manner as in a
single-member district. Then the scoring is tallied again, but
excluding the first winner. The top two in that second scoring stage
are then compared to produce the second winner. Then the process is
repeated as many times as needed to fill all of the seats: Remove the
previous winner(s), tally the score, compare the top 2 to determine the
additional winner. Repeat.
The Independent Party of Oregon used STAR Voting exclusively in its 2020
primary election.
Dan Meek
503-293-9021 dan at meek.net <mailto:dan at meek.net> 855-280-0488 fax
On 2/27/2021 1:59 PM, Christopher S. Elmendorf wrote:
>
> Mark, the Coombs rule (with the modification I suggested for unranked
> candidates) doesn’t give voters any more power to eliminate
> candidates, it just means that a voter’s unexpressed preference
> between unranked candidates is not reflected in the election’s result.
>
> Here’s an example. Assume four candidates, A, B, C, and D. After the
> first round of voting, C and D have the most fourth-place votes, with
> 1000 and 1001 respectively.
>
> There is a voter, call him Adam for his adamance, who ranked only
> candidate A. Adam’s failure to express a preference over B, C, and D
> would be treated as a last-place vote for each. This increments their
> respective tallies of 4^th place votes by one, such that C is now
> treated as receiving 1001 4^th place votes, and D as receiving 1002.
> The relative position of C and D is unchanged, so D gets eliminated in
> the first round. Perhaps Adam had a preference for D over C, but he
> didn’t express it, so it’s not reflected in the election outcome. His
> failure to record his preference mades his vote less impactful, that’s
> all.
>
> The strongest argument against the Coombs Rule is probably its
> vulnerability to strategic voting
> <https://www.accuratedemocracy.com/l_data.htm>. In my original
> example, if the AOC and the Trump voters coordinate to rank the
> moderate candidates last, then the moderate candidates would be
> eliminated first and the race would come down to the two extreme
> candidates. But that kind of coordination seems rather unlikely in a
> world of strong affective partisanship.
>
> CE
>
> *From: *Mark Scarberry <mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
> *Date: *Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:00 PM
> *To: *Samuel S. Wang <sswang at princeton.edu>
> *Cc: *Christopher S. Elmendorf <cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu>, Pildes, Rick
> <rick.pildes at nyu.edu>, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>, Election Law
> Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject: *Re: [EL] "How to Keep Extremists Out of Power"
>
> I'm certainly no expert on this, but treating the three unranked
> candidates on the single vote ballot as coming in fourth on that
> ballot would seem to give that voter three times the power to
> eliminate other candidates -- the voter will have been allowed to cast
> three 4th place votes.
>
> Mark
>
> Pepperdine wordmark
>
> *Caruso School of Law*
>
>
>
> *
> *Mark S. Scarberry**
>
> *Professor of Law
> **mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu* <mailto:mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
>
> Personal: mark.scarberry at gmail.com <mailto:mark.scarberry at gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 12:15 PM Samuel S. Wang <sswang at princeton.edu
> <mailto:sswang at princeton.edu>> wrote:
>
> Dear Chris (cc:all),
>
> That sounds reasonable, though one might want to tinker with the
> statutory wording and do some simulations to make sure the
> Coombs-rule concept played out as desired.
>
> Warmly,
>
> Sam
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*Christopher S. Elmendorf <cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu
> <mailto:cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu>>
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 27, 2021 3:04 PM
> *To:* Samuel S. Wang <sswang at princeton.edu
> <mailto:sswang at princeton.edu>>; Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu
> <mailto:rick.pildes at nyu.edu>>; Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu
> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>; Election Law Listserv
> <law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
> *Subject:* Re: "How to Keep Extremists Out of Power"
>
> Sam, couldn’t this problem be fixed by treating the second ballot
> as having a “tied vote” for 4^th place? Candidates Golden, Hoar,
> and Bond, who were not ranked, would all be counted as if they’d
> been ranked forth. The candidate with the most 4^th place votes
> would be eliminated in the first round, and then the ballots cast
> for that candidate would be reallocated.
>
> --C.
>
> *From: *Samuel S. Wang <sswang at princeton.edu
> <mailto:sswang at princeton.edu>>
> *Date: *Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 11:56 AM
> *To: *Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu
> <mailto:rick.pildes at nyu.edu>>, Christopher S. Elmendorf
> <cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu <mailto:cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu>>, Rick
> Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>, Election
> Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
> *Subject: *Re: "How to Keep Extremists Out of Power"
>
> The Coombs rule is conceptually attractive in a world of perfectly
> compliant voters. But there's an issue. it treats ballot
> truncation in a nonintuitive manner. As written in Grofman and
> Feld (2004), it treats ballots in which only one candidate is
> ranked as being last-choice ballots.
>
> For example, this ballot
>
> 1. Poliquin
>
> 2. Golden
>
> 3. Hoar
>
> 4. Bond
>
> would eliminate Bond first, whereas this ballot
>
> 1. Poliquin
>
> 2/3/4 left blank
>
> would eliminate Poliquin.
>
> Recall that Poliquin instructed his supporters to make only one
> choice, as a means of protesting the new voting rule. I guess he
> would not have done that if the Coombs rule had applied...but do
> you really want a rule to penalize a candidate whose supporters
> won't slog all the way down the ballot?
>
> More on what happened in Maine:
>
> https://election.princeton.edu/2020/08/13/ranked-choice-voting-on-the-docket-in-maine/
>
> https://election.princeton.edu/2020/08/14/ranked-choice-voting-wins-in-court-in-maine/
>
> Best,
>
> Sam
>
> >>>
>
> Prof. Samuel S.-H. Wang
>
> Neuroscience Institute, Washington Road
>
> Princeton University
>
> Princeton, NJ 08544
>
> Office: (609) 258-0388
>
> Virtual office: http://princeton.zoom.us/my/samwang
>
> Neuroscience: synapse.princeton.edu <http://synapse.princeton.edu>
>
> Redistricting: gerrymander.princeton.edu
> <http://gerrymander.princeton.edu>
>
> Election analytics: election.princeton.edu
> <http://election.princeton.edu>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>> on behalf
> of Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu <mailto:rick.pildes at nyu.edu>>
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 27, 2021 2:02 PM
> *To:* Christopher S. Elmendorf <cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu
> <mailto:cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu>>; Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu
> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>; Election Law Listserv
> <law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] "How to Keep Extremists Out of Power"
>
> I’m glad Chris is raising these questions (and that visualization
> is great, I will use it in class). These are good questions and
> I’m interested in hearing from others about them.
>
> Best,
>
> Rick
>
> Richard H. Pildes
>
> Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law
>
> NYU School of Law
>
> 40 Washington Square So.
>
> NYC, NY 10014
>
> 347-886-6789
>
> *From:*Christopher S. Elmendorf [mailto:cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu
> <mailto:cselmendorf at ucdavis.edu>]
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 27, 2021 1:20 PM
> *To:* Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>;
> Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu
> <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>; Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu
> <mailto:rick.pildes at nyu.edu>>
> *Subject:* "How to Keep Extremists Out of Power"
>
> Apropos Rick P’s excellent op-ed, I’d like to see more public
> debate about the decision rule for retallying votes under RCV
> systems. To the best of my knowledge, every U.S. RCV system drops
> the candidate with the fewest first place votes (or first place +
> reallocated votes) after each round. But as Bernie Grofman showed
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.polisci.upenn.edu_ppec_sawyer_Speakers_Speakers-27-2520Publications_Feld-2DAlternative-2520vote-2520Coombs-2520rule.pdf&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=gzwkqcfuqUsoxvOV9NvO6--MK1Q0HVEAUD2SpkD4Oiw&e=>some
> years ago, the “Coombs Rule,” under which the candidate with the
> most last place votes (or non-rankings) is dropped after each
> round, does a much better job finding the Condorcet winner.
>
> In a statewide top-4 race between a Trump-style candidate, an
> AOC-style candidate, and a couple of moderates, it seems quite
> likely that the moderate candidates would be eliminated early
> under the usual RCV rule. Here’s a nice visualization
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__imgur.com_gallery_SLTHgCO&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=jpuP7ZliZ-_WEIWfYrpe3on9eM00uUyUtoB71GNLZvY&e=>.
>
>
> (There’s also a serious question about whether voters can even
> discern candidate ideology
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__onlinelibrary.wiley.com_doi_full_10.1111_lsq.12113-3Fcasa-5Ftoken-3DMhEWDh14tvYAAAAA-253Aj6WZ74-2D9tXhP1olp4-5Fhm6BNZdUMFX70-2D37zBTYJnucp8QmuLfTxu8RnpokqzWB-2DOp4Yz-5Fry2DSfZk4I&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=53eivofqCwWmlCVtMimZFsnoyWGU5NieXDPjEypSSs4&e=>in
> typical legislative races…)
>
> --Chris
>
> ------
>
> Christopher S. Elmendorf
>
> Martin Luther King, Jr. Professor of Law
>
> UC Davis School of Law
>
>
> “How to Keep Extremists Out of Power”
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__electionlawblog.org_-3Fp-3D120978&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=aIp0iizqCZK6H4Drttf3HmytXEDYanCp8O1sQMi2Rls&e=>
>
> Posted on February 25, 2021 9:59 am
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__electionlawblog.org_-3Fp-3D120978&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=aIp0iizqCZK6H4Drttf3HmytXEDYanCp8O1sQMi2Rls&e=> by
> *Richard Pildes*
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__electionlawblog.org_-3Fauthor-3D7&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=N-W8zEtfyYkfWvFg_bhM4uQmC2VFNj2zTWahgZ6vnog&e=>
>
> That’s the title the NYT gave my latest piece
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.nytimes.com_2021_02_25_opinion_elections-2Dpolitics-2Dextremists.html&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=Myy2jvfbosqBkLUswBfVOCdihK3XTnqbSeEBkjvqpn4&e=>.
> I’ll include an excerpt here, though it’s a bit hard to excerpt
> this one because I raise reform proposals in four different areas:
>
> /American democracy faces alarming risks from extremist forces
> that have rapidly gained ground in our politics. The most urgent
> focus of political reform must be to marginalize, to the extent
> possible, these destabilizing forces./
>
> /Every reform proposal must be judged through this lens: Is it
> likely to fuel or to weaken the power of extremist politics and
> candidates?/
>
> /In healthy democracies, they are rewarded for appealing to the
> broadest forces in politics, not the narrowest. This is precisely
> why American elections take place in a “first past the post”
> system rather than the proportional representation system many
> other democracies use./
>
> /What structural changes would reward politicians whose appeal is
> broadest? We should start with a focus on four areas./
>
> */Reform the presidential nomination process/*
>
> /Until the 1970s, presidential nominees were selected through a
> convention-based system, which means that a candidate had to
> obtain a broad consensus among the various interests and factions
> in the party. “Brokered conventions” — which required several
> rounds of balloting to choose a nominee — offered a vivid
> demonstration of how the sausage of consensus was made. In 1952,
> for example, the Republican Party convention selected the more
> moderate Dwight D. Eisenhower over Robert A. Taft, the popular
> leader of the more extreme wing of the party, who opposed the
> creation of NATO. …/
>
> /How can we restore some of the party-wide consensus the
> convention system required? The parties can use ranked-choice
> voting, which allows voters to rank candidates in order of
> preference. This rewards candidates with broad appeal to a party’s
> voters, even if they have fewer passionate supporters. …
> Ranked-choice voting reduces the prospects of factional party
> candidates. Presidents with a broad base of support can institute
> major reforms, as Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt,
> Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan demonstrated./
>
> */Reform the party primaries/*
>
> /Many incumbents take more extreme positions than they might
> otherwise endorse because they worry about a primary challenge./
>
> /One way to help defang that threat is to eliminate “sore-loser”
> laws. These laws, which exist in some form in //47 states/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__reformelectionsnow.org_wp-2Dcontent_uploads_2020_03_REN-2DWhite-2DPaper-2DSore-2DLoser-2DLaws-2DFINALlk3202020-2D1.pdf&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=YbyNtUDzrG4bzRBgYCmMYhMycolXqv3czsLlX2m3fkM&e=>/,
> bar candidates who have lost in a party primary from running in
> the general election as an independent or third-party candidate.
> Thus, if a more moderate candidate loses in a primary to a more
> extreme one, that person is shut out from the general election —
> even if he or she would likely beat the (sometimes extreme)
> winners of the party primaries. One //study/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__citeseerx.ist.psu.edu_viewdoc_summary-3Fdoi-3D10.1.1.384.2884&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=CQtwpCLtFp-Vtzqnxo0EV2iL5F-rpu7QHlyhXoagF74&e=>/ finds
> that sore-loser laws favor more ideological candidates: Democratic
> candidates in states with the law are nearly six points more
> liberal and Republicans nearly nine-to-10 points more conservative
> than in states without these laws. …/
>
> */Reform gerrymandering/*
>
> /Many reformers agree on the need to take redistricting out of the
> hands of partisan state legislatures and give it to a commission.
> In several recent state ballot initiatives, voters have endorsed
> this change. But that still raises a question: What constitutes a
> fair map?/
>
> /Redistricting reform should have as a goal the creation of
> //competitive //election districts. Competitive districts pressure
> candidates from both the left and the right, which creates
> incentives to appeal to the political center. They also encourage
> more moderate candidates to run in the first place, because they
> know they have a greater prospect of winning than in a district
> whose seat is safe for the other party./
>
> /[I’ve left out suggestions for the right direction for campaign
> finance reform]/
>
> /Jan. 6 provided a painful demonstration of the dangerous currents
> gathering in American political culture. Every proposed election
> reform must now be measured against this reality to make sure
> political reform furthers American democracy./
>
> I’m aware of ongoing debates about these issues, which there was
> no space to address in the NYT. My goal was to frame the general
> question and encourage debate and discussion about these specific
> proposals, along with additional ones that should be part of the
> conversation. I’ll respond in later posts or elsewhere to what I
> expect will be some pushback on some of these ideas.
>
> Share
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.addtoany.com_share-23url-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Felectionlawblog.org-252F-253Fp-253D120978-26title-3D-25E2-2580-259CHow-2520to-2520Keep-2520Extremists-2520Out-2520of-2520Power-25E2-2580-259D&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=Qd6cbzgDEztA0kvALS-gedUi5CNf1_Jsme9sdYRpEKg&e=>
>
> Posted in Uncategorized
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__electionlawblog.org_-3Fcat-3D1&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=3Yrf6Er8CWKa0kt6MHYlCarRjmwnOtfX3E0R68B84xA&e=>
>
> --
>
> Rick Hasen
>
> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
>
> UC Irvine School of Law
>
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
>
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
>
> 949.824.3072 - office
>
> rhasen at law.uci.edu <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
>
> http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.law.uci.edu_faculty_full-2Dtime_hasen_&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=zml8VgdGNyh6_EMeU8_6Zwl7xO9a0FLdhQ-K8L7rrs8&e=>
>
> http://electionlawblog.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__electionlawblog.org_&d=DwMF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=OUDXV_PXxCjObt0s6JFe9Ua2eL0-OdErgNbhw3XjigM&s=ptedQqK5MAd91xeNme1YUehhh-NSUfSCH2ekXCHCdlQ&e=>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210228/2126a1e0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 2026 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210228/2126a1e0/attachment.png>
View list directory