4,193
edits
Exhausted ballot: Difference between revisions
User:RobLa is quoting a couple of sections of Instant-runoff voting in order to use them in subsequent revisions of this article:<ref>User:RobLa quoted oldid 1141090457 of w:Instant-runoff voting: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&oldid=1141090457
(Better adapting the text that I copied into this article) |
(User:RobLa is quoting a couple of sections of Instant-runoff voting in order to use them in subsequent revisions of this article:<ref>User:RobLa quoted oldid 1141090457 of w:Instant-runoff voting: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&oldid=1141090457) |
||
Line 149:
What does it mean that some ballot Choices / Rankings are Discarded / Exhausted (never considered in the final tally)?
== Wikipedia quote about "Instant-runoff voting"==
[[User:RobLa]] is quoting a couple of sections of [[w:Instant-runoff voting|Instant-runoff voting]] in order to use them in subsequent revisions of this article:<ref>[[User:RobLa]] quoted oldid 1141090457 of [[w:Instant-runoff voting|]]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&oldid=1141090457</ref>
<blockquote>
===Invalid ballots and incomplete ballots===
All forms of ranked choice voting reduce to plurality when all ballots rank only one candidate. By extension, ballots for which all candidates ranked are eliminated are equivalent to votes for any non-winner in plurality, and considered exhausted.
Because the ballot marking is more complex, there can be an increase in spoiled ballots. In Australia, voters are required to write a number beside every candidate,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://aec.gov.au/Voting/How_to_Vote/Voting_HOR.htm |title=Voting in the House of Representatives |publisher=Australian Electoral Commission |date=28 June 2016 |access-date=9 December 2018}}</ref> and the rate of spoiled ballots can be five times higher than plurality voting elections.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.no2av.org/why-vote-no/av-myth-busting/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110208014140/http://www.no2av.org/why-vote-no/av-myth-busting/ |url-status = dead|archive-date=8 February 2011 |title=Busting the Myths of AV |publisher=No2av.org |date=25 October 2010 |access-date=17 April 2011 }}</ref>{{Unreliable source?|date=January 2021}} Since Australia has compulsory voting, however, it is difficult to tell how many ballots are deliberately spoiled.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2011/02/informal-voting-two-ways-of-allowing-more-votes-to-count.html |title=Informal Voting – Two Ways of Allowing More Votes to Count |publisher=ABC Elections |date=28 February 2011 |access-date=15 August 2011}}</ref> Where complete rankings are not required, a ballot may become inactive if none of the ranked choices on that ballot advance to the next round.
Most jurisdictions with IRV do not require complete rankings and may use columns to indicate preference instead of numbers. In American elections with IRV, more than 99% of voters typically cast a valid ballot.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://politicalreform.newamerica.net/files/irvracememo.pdf |title=Instant Runoff Voting and Its Impact on Racial Minorities |publisher=New America Foundation |date=1 August 2008 |access-date=15 August 2011 |url-status = dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110615181347/http://politicalreform.newamerica.net/files/irvracememo.pdf |archive-date=15 June 2011 }}</ref>
A 2015 study of four local U.S. elections that used IRV found that inactive ballots occurred often enough in each of them that the winner of each election did not receive a majority of votes cast in the first round. The rate of inactive ballots in each election ranged from a low of 9.6% to a high of 27.1%.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Burnett|first1=Craig M.|last2=Kogan|first2=Vladimir|title=Ballot (and voter) 'exhaustion' under Instant Runoff Voting: An examination of four ranked-choice elections|journal=Electoral Studies|date=March 2015|volume=37|pages=41–49|doi=10.1016/j.electstud.2014.11.006|s2cid=11159132}}</ref> As one point of comparison, the number of votes cast in the 190 regularly scheduled primary runoff elections for the U.S. House and U.S. Senate from 1994 to 2016 decreased from the initial primary on average by 39%,
according to a 2016 study by FairVote.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://fairvote.app.box.com/v/federalprimaryrunoffs2016 | title=Box}}</ref>
==Terminology==
Instant-runoff voting derives its name from the way the ballot count simulates a series of runoffs, similar to an [[Exhaustive ballot|exhaustive ballot system]], except that voter preferences do not change between rounds.<ref name="publications.parliament.uk">{{cite web |date=15 February 2001 |title=Second Report: Election of a Speaker |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmproced/40/4005.htm |access-date=18 February 2008 |publisher=House of Commons Select Committee on Procedure}}<!--This ref describes similarities/differences between IRV and exhaustive ballot.--></ref> It is also known as the alternative vote, transferable vote, ranked-choice voting (RCV), single-seat ranked-choice voting, or preferential voting.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Cary |first=David |date=1 January 2011 |title=Estimating the Margin of Victory for Instant-runoff Voting |url=http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2028012.2028015 |journal=Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Electronic Voting Technology/Workshop on Trustworthy Elections |series=EVT/WOTE'11 |pages=3}}</ref>
</blockquote>
=Opponent of RCV=
| |||