Single transferable vote: Difference between revisions

Line 12:

The concept of transferable voting was first proposed by [[Thomas Wright Hill]] in 1819.<ref>[[Nicolaus Tideman]], ''Collective Decisions and Voting: The Potential for Public Choice'', Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington VT, 2006.</ref> The system remained unused in public elections until 1855, when [[Carl Andræ]] proposed a transferable vote system for elections in [[Denmark]].<ref name=humphreys>{{cite book |last1=Humphreys |first1=John H |title=Proportional Representation, A Study in Methods of Election |date=1911 |publisher=Methuen & Co.Ltd |location=London |url=https://archive.org/details/proportionalrepr00humpuoft}}</ref> Andræ's system was used in 1856 to elect the Danish [[Rigsdag]], and by 1866 it was also adapted for indirect elections to the second chamber, the [[Landsting (Denmark)|Landsting]], until 1915.

Although he was not the first to propose a system of transferable votes, the English [[barrister]] [[Thomas Hare (political scientist)|Thomas Hare]] is generally credited with the conception of Single Transferable Voting, and he may have independently developed the idea in 1857.<ref name=humphreys/> Hare's view was that STV should be a means of "making the exercise of the suffrage a step in the elevation of the individual character, whether it be found in the majority or the minority." In [[Hare method (STV)|Hare's original STV system]], he further proposed that electors should have the opportunity of discovering which candidate their vote had ultimately counted for, to improve their personal connection with voting.<ref name="Lambert">

Although he was not the first to propose a system of transferable votes, the English [[barrister]] [[Thomas Hare (political scientist)|Thomas Hare]] is generally credited with the conception of Single Transferable Voting, and he may have independently developed the idea in 1857.<ref name=humphreys/> Hare's view was that STV should be a means of "making the exercise of the suffrage a step in the elevation of the individual character, whether it be found in the majority or the minority." In [[Hare method (STV)|Hare's original STV system]], he further proposed that electors should have the opportunity of discovering which candidate their vote had ultimately counted for, to improve their personal connection with voting.<ref name="Lambert">{{cite book|title=Voting in democracies: a study of majority and proportional electoral systems|last1=Lakeman|first1=Enid|last2=Lambert|first2=James D.|year=1959|page=245|publisher=Faber & Faber}}

Lambert & Lakeman (1955). "Voting in democracies". London : Faber, pg. 245.

</ref>

The noted political essayist, [[John Stuart Mill]], was a friend of Hare and an early proponent of STV, praising it in his 1861 essay ''[[Considerations on Representative Government]]''. His contemporary, [[Walter Bagehot]], also praised the Hare system for allowing everyone to elect an MP, even ideological minorities, but also added that the Hare system would create more problems than it solved: "[the Hare system] is inconsistent with the extrinsic independence as well as the inherent moderation of a Parliament – two of the conditions we have seen, are essential to the bare possibility of parliamentary government."<ref name="Bagehot">Bagehot, Walter. "English Constitution".

The noted political essayist, [[John Stuart Mill]], was a friend of Hare and an early proponent of STV, praising it in his 1861 essay ''[[Considerations on Representative Government]]''. His contemporary, [[Walter Bagehot]], also praised the Hare system for allowing everyone to elect an MP, even ideological minorities, but also added that the Hare system would create more problems than it solved: "[the Hare system] is inconsistent with the extrinsic independence as well as the inherent moderation of a Parliament – two of the conditions we have seen, are essential to the bare possibility of parliamentary government."<ref name="Bagehot">{{cite book | last=Bagehot | first=Walter | title=The English Constitution | publisher=Cambridge University Press | publication-place=Cambridge | year=2001 | isbn=978-1-139-16383-5 | doi=10.1017/cbo9781139163835|url=https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/bagehot/constitution.pdf}}

</ref>

Line 267:

Line 266:

STV has several variations that can be discussed. For example, Meek and Warren STV are variants of STV that attempt to make the process fairer, but at the cost of needing to be computerized to compute the result.

There is some discussion regarding how to make STV results more transparent, while limiting the ability of vote-riggers to identify specific voters by having access to all of the preference data. <ref>http://www.votingmatters.org.uk/ISSUE30/I30P2.pdf</ref>

There is some discussion regarding how to make STV results more transparent, while limiting the ability of vote-riggers to identify specific voters by having access to all of the preference data. <ref name="Lee">{{cite journal|last=Naish|first=Lee|title=Partial disclosure of votes in STV elections|journal=Voting matters|volume=30|pages=9-13|year=2013|url=http://www.votingmatters.org.uk/ISSUE30/I30P2.pdf}}</ref>

=== Related Election Methods ===