Recent from talks
Cumulative voting
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
Cumulative voting
Cumulative voting (sometimes called the single divisible vote) is an election system where a voter casts multiple votes but can lump votes on a specific candidate or can split their votes across multiple candidates. The candidates elected are those receiving the largest number of votes cast in the election, up to the number of representatives to be elected.
Cumulative voting can simplify strategic voting, by allowing larger groups of voters to elect multiple representatives by splitting their vote between multiple candidates. This removes the complexity associated with randomized or coordinated strategies.
It may be thought of as a variant of block voting. Under both cumulative voting and block voting, a voter casts multiple votes but in the case of cumulative voting, can lump them all on one candidate (the equivalent of engaging in plumping). When voters do this, the result is similar to SNTV. When supporters of a minority candidate do this, they may be of sufficient strength to elect that minority representative, not a likely occurrence under either first past the post voting or block voting. Thus, cumulative voting generally produces similar results to SNTV (especially if voters are informed and rational, in which case they will tend to engage in plumping. Plumping though reduces cumulative voting's effectiveness at reducing need for strategic voting by allowing the voter to cast a split vote.).
Cumulative voting can also be thought of as a form of cardinal voting: a variant on score voting where the total scores for each candidate must add up to a fixed value (e.g. 100%). If instead the sum of squares must add up to a fixed value, the method becomes quadratic voting.
Cumulative voting is semi-proportional, allowing for more representative government than winner-take-all elections using block plurality voting or block instant-runoff voting. Cumulative voting is commonly used in corporate governance, where it is mandated by 7 U.S. states.
The method can also be used in participatory budgeting.
Cumulative voting was used to elect the Illinois House of Representatives from 1870 until its repeal in 1980 and used in England and Scotland in the late 19th century to elect some school boards. As of March 2012, more than fifty communities in the United States use cumulative voting, all resulting from cases brought under the National Voting Rights Act of 1965. Among them are Peoria, Illinois for half of its city council, Chilton County, Alabama for its county council and school board, and Amarillo, Texas, for its school board and College Board of Regents. Courts sometimes mandate its use as a remedy in lawsuits brought under the Voting Rights Act in the United States; an example of this occurred in 2009 in Port Chester, New York which had its first cumulative voting elections for its board of trustees in 2010.
Cumulative voting was also used to elect city boards in Toronto, Canada starting in 1904. The Proportional Representation Review (September 1903) described it like this:
Hub AI
Cumulative voting AI simulator
(@Cumulative voting_simulator)
Cumulative voting
Cumulative voting (sometimes called the single divisible vote) is an election system where a voter casts multiple votes but can lump votes on a specific candidate or can split their votes across multiple candidates. The candidates elected are those receiving the largest number of votes cast in the election, up to the number of representatives to be elected.
Cumulative voting can simplify strategic voting, by allowing larger groups of voters to elect multiple representatives by splitting their vote between multiple candidates. This removes the complexity associated with randomized or coordinated strategies.
It may be thought of as a variant of block voting. Under both cumulative voting and block voting, a voter casts multiple votes but in the case of cumulative voting, can lump them all on one candidate (the equivalent of engaging in plumping). When voters do this, the result is similar to SNTV. When supporters of a minority candidate do this, they may be of sufficient strength to elect that minority representative, not a likely occurrence under either first past the post voting or block voting. Thus, cumulative voting generally produces similar results to SNTV (especially if voters are informed and rational, in which case they will tend to engage in plumping. Plumping though reduces cumulative voting's effectiveness at reducing need for strategic voting by allowing the voter to cast a split vote.).
Cumulative voting can also be thought of as a form of cardinal voting: a variant on score voting where the total scores for each candidate must add up to a fixed value (e.g. 100%). If instead the sum of squares must add up to a fixed value, the method becomes quadratic voting.
Cumulative voting is semi-proportional, allowing for more representative government than winner-take-all elections using block plurality voting or block instant-runoff voting. Cumulative voting is commonly used in corporate governance, where it is mandated by 7 U.S. states.
The method can also be used in participatory budgeting.
Cumulative voting was used to elect the Illinois House of Representatives from 1870 until its repeal in 1980 and used in England and Scotland in the late 19th century to elect some school boards. As of March 2012, more than fifty communities in the United States use cumulative voting, all resulting from cases brought under the National Voting Rights Act of 1965. Among them are Peoria, Illinois for half of its city council, Chilton County, Alabama for its county council and school board, and Amarillo, Texas, for its school board and College Board of Regents. Courts sometimes mandate its use as a remedy in lawsuits brought under the Voting Rights Act in the United States; an example of this occurred in 2009 in Port Chester, New York which had its first cumulative voting elections for its board of trustees in 2010.
Cumulative voting was also used to elect city boards in Toronto, Canada starting in 1904. The Proportional Representation Review (September 1903) described it like this:
Recent media