Elections In Australia Ireland And Malta Under The Single Transferable Vote

DIVProvides the first systematic cross-national look at the operation of the Single Transferable Vote electoral system /div

The Single Transferable Vote, or STV, is often seen in very positive terms by electoral reformers, yet relatively little is known about its actual workings beyond one or two specific settings. This book gathers leading experts on STV from around the world to discuss the examples they know best, and represents the first systematic cross-national study of STV. Furthermore, the contributors collectively build an understanding of electoral systems as institutions embedded within a wider social and political context, and begins to explain the gap between analytical models and the actual practice of elections in Australia, Ireland, and Malta. Rather than seeing electoral institutions in purely mechanical terms, the collection of essays in this volume shows that the effects of electoral system may be contingent rather than automatic. On the basis of solid empirical evidence, the volume argues that the same political system can, in fact, have quite different effects under different conditions. Contributors to the volume are Shaun Bowler, David Farrell, Michael Gallagher, Bernard Grofman, Wolfgang Hirczy, Colin Hughes, J. Paul Johnston, Michael Laver, Malcom Mackerras, Michael Maley, Michael Marsh, Ian McAllister, and Ben Reilly. Shaun Bowler is Professor of Political Science, University of California, Riverside. Bernard Grofman is Professor of Political Science, University of California, Irvine.

In the summer of 1967, in response to violent demonstrations that rocked 164 U.S. cities, the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, a.k.a. the Kerner Commission, was formed. The Commission sought reasons for the disturbances, including the role that law enforcement played. Chief among its research projects was a study of 23 American cities, headed by social psychologist Robert Shellow. An early draft of the scientists’ analysis, titled “The Harvest of American Racism: The Political Meaning of Violence in the Summer of 1967,” provoked the Commission’s staff in November 1967 by uncovering political causes for the unrest; the team of researchers was fired, and the controversial report remained buried at the LBJ Presidential Library until now. ? The first publication of the Harvest report half a century later reveals that many of the issues it describes are still with us, including how cities might more effectively and humanely react to groups and communities in protest. In addition to the complete text of the suppressed Harvest report, the book includes an introduction by Robert Shellow that provides useful historical context; personal recollections from four of the report’s surviving social scientists, Robert Shellow, David Boesel, Gary T. Marx, and David O. Sears; and an appendix outlining the differences between the unpublished Harvest analysis and the well-known Kerner Commission Report that followed it. “The [Harvest of American Racism] report was rejected by Johnson administration functionaries as being far too radical—politically ‘unviable’... Social science can play an extremely positive role in fighting racial and other injustice and inequality, but only if it is matched with a powerful political will to implement the findings. That will has never come from within an American presidential administration—that will has only been forged in black and other radical communities’ movements for justice. The political power for change, as incremental as it has been, has come from within those communities. Washington responds, it does not lead." —from the Foreword by Michael C. Dawson

The Australian Electoral System provides the first-ever comprehensive study of the design of Australian electoral systems. It focuses on the two electoral systems, both 'preferential', that are most closely associated with Australia: namely the alternative vote and the single transferable vote. The book covers four main themes. First, it traces the origins of Australia's electoral systems, explaining how and why Australia ended up with such a relatively unique arrangement. Second, it explores the range of variation in the detail of how the various schemes operate - variations which can have significant behavioural and electoral consequences. Third, it uses aggregate and survey data to systematically analyse the consequences of electoral system design. Fourth, it examines voter reaction to these systems, both in Australia and also cross-nationally.

Essay from the year 2003 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Region: Australia, New Zealand, grade: Distinction, Flinders University (Social Sciences), course: Australian Politcs a comparative study, 14 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: This essay aims to explain the differences between preferential and proportional systems of voting and the consequences of these systems in Australia. The electoral system of Germany is examined in comparison. Why are electoral systems so important? Through elections, citizens of a county can express their views and choose the government they wish to see in power. Therefore, the electoral system is one of the significant features of a democracy and a representative government. The political outcome of an election can vary greatly depending on which of the different types (and/or variations of each type) of systems is in effect. Hence, the organisation of the political system strongly depends on the electoral system.1 The impacts of electoral systems on the political and party system will be examined after looking at the two systems of voting used in Australia at the Commonwealth/ Federal level: the preferential voting system and the system of proportional representation. Preferential voting in single-member seats is used for elections for the House of Representatives and is also often referred to as Alternative Vote.2 A distinctive feature of this voting system is that the winning candidate needs to receive an absolute majority of the primary vote, in other words 50% plus one. Alternatively, the candidate can win the election by securing an absolute majority after the distribution of preferences. 3 Under a system of full preferential voting, electors must indicate a preference for all candidates listed on the ballot paper. Voters show their first preference by giving the number “1” to their preferred candidate. They then rank all other candidates by distributing the remaining numbers in descending order from 2 to X (X = the number of candidates taking part in the election). In the first round of counting votes, the numbers of primary votes are registered. [...] 1 David W. Lovell et al., The Australian Political System, (2nd edition), Longman, South Melbourne, 1998, p. 269. 2 Ben Reilly, ‘The Alternative Vote in Australia’, 6 March 1999, Electoral Systems, Administration and Cost of Elections Project, , consulted 2 June 2003

Australia was the first nation to invent itself through the ballot box and has become a country renowned for democratic innovations, from the secret ballot to adult suffrage and Saturday elections. Many of these reforms are now benchmarks of democracy. Yet the equity of Australia's electoral process continues to be challenged. Does Australia have full, free and fair elections? The authors of this informative, entertaining volume tell of political forces and personalities which have shaped Australia's electoral system. They describe how Australia became a pacesetter, why it experimented so much and whether the experiments have worked. They go on to consider what could and should be done, and the major modern challenges. Are party politics and pre-selections a corrupting influence? What is the impact of a mobile and scattered population? How widespread are the 'rorts'? Could we have a 'Florida' down under? Elections - Full, Free and Fair is an edited volume on Australian electoral history and innovations, providing a broad commentary on continuing democratic challenges. This well-researched book on democracy and electoral justice covers topics of perennial importance. The project was supported by the ANU, the Australian Electoral Commission, Old Parliament House and the Parliamentary Education Office.

DIVConsiders how electoral rules affect election results and argues that the impact of the same electoral systems is different from one culture to another /div