 |
Add to My Group
We Can Do Better than Instant Runoff Voting
By Stephen Unger (about the author) Page 2 of 2 page(s)
10 RD
5 RG
20 D
10 DG
5 DR
20 GD
3 GR
2 G
So D would have won with 65%, versus 48% for R and 40% for G.
AV votes corresponding to Example 2 (where IRV failed) might have been:
25 R
10 RD
5 RG
20 G
10 GD
5 GR
15 DG
6 D
4 DR
So G would have won with 55%, versus 49% for R and 45% for D.
Under AV, approval of X can only help X win; it cannot affect the scores of other candidates. If F is one's favorite candidate and if B is a possible winner that one strongly opposes, then approving F and NOT approving B is NEVER a mistake.
A fundamental weakness of IRV is that a voter cannot express the difference between
(1) "I like A best, B a little less, and I hate C"
and
(2) "I like A best, I hate B, and hate C even more".
In either case, the IRV vote would have to be ABC. For the same situations, under AV, we could differentiate between 1 and 2, respectively, by approving BOTH A and B for case 1, or only A for case 2. It s not hard to find examples where such distinctions result in different winners.
A generalization of AV is "Range Voting" (RV), where, for each candidate, the voter assigns an integer in some range, such as 0 thru 4. (AV is the special case where the range is 0, 1). This allows voters to express their views more precisely. While a bit more complex than AV, it is not terribly hard to tabulate, and never leads to bizarre scenarios. On balance, it would probably be best to move from PV to AV, which would require only minimal changes in election procedures and solve the major problems of PV. Later, a refinement to RV might be considered. There is no reason at all to adopt IRV as opposed to AV.
Further discussion of this issue, with references and more examples, is in "Instant Runoff Voting: Looks Good--But Look Again". Articles on other topics of interest to progressives, including additional election-related issues, can be found at "Ends and Means".
1 | 2
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
by Steven J Brams
Number of pages: 19
Publisher: New York University, Faculty of Arts and Science, Dept. of Economics
by Roger B Myerson
Number of pages: 37
Publisher: Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University
by S.J. Brams
$7.95
Number of pages: 18
Publisher: Elsevier
| 11 comments |
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0) Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
