Narrowing the field in elections: the next-two rule

Brams, Steven J. and Kilgour, D. Marc (2011): Narrowing the field in elections: the next-two rule.

Abstract

We suggest a new approach to narrowing the field in elections, based on the deservingness of candidates to be contenders in a runoff, or to be declared one of several winners. Instead of specifying some minimum percentage (e.g., 50) that the leading candidate must surpass to avoid a runoff (usually between the top two candidates), we propose that the number of contenders depend on the distribution of votes among candidates. Divisor methods of apportionment proposed by Jefferson and Webster, among others, provide measures of deservingness, but they can prescribe a runoff even when one candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote.

We propose a new measure of deservingness, called the Next-Two rule, which compares the performance of candidates to the two that immediately follow them. It never prescribes a runoff when one candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote. More generally, it identifies as contenders candidates who are bunched together near the top and, unlike the Jefferson and Webster methods, never declares that all candidates are contenders. We apply the Next-Two rule to several empirical examples, including one (elections to major league baseball’s Hall of Fame) in which more than one candidate can be elected.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: voting; contenders in elections; runoffs; apportionment; fairness
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D74 - Conflict ; Conflict Resolution ; Alliances ; Revolutions

References

Balinski, Michel L, and H. Peyton Young (1982/2001). Fair Representation: Meeting the Ideal of One Man, One Vote, 1st ed./2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press/Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Baseball Hall of Fame Balloting (2010, 2011). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_Hall_of_Fame_balloting,_2011

Blais, André, and Louis Massicotte (2002). “Electoral Systems.” In Lawrence LeDuc, Richard S. Niemi, and Pippa Norris (eds.), Comparing Democracies 2: New Challenges in the Study of Elections and Voting. London: Sage, pp. 40-69.

Bouton, Laurent (2011). “A Theory of Strategic Voting in Runoff Elections.” Preprint, Department of Economics, Boston University.

Brams, Steven J. (1978/2007). The Presidential Election Game, 1st ed./2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press/Natick, MA: A K Peters.

Brams, Steven J. (2008). Mathematics and Democracy: Designing Better Voting and Fair-Division Procedures. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Brams, Steven J. and Peter C. Fishburn (1978). “Approval Voting,” American Political Science Review 72, no. 3 (September): 831-847.

Brams, Steven J., and Peter C. Fishburn (1983/2007). Approval Voting, 1st ed./2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Birkhäuser Boston/New York: Springer.

Cox, Gary W. (1997). Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Feld, Scott L., and Bernard Grofman (2007). “The Laakso-Taagepera Index in a Mean and Variance Framework, Journal of Theoretical Politics 19, no. 1: 101-106.

Grofman, Bernard (2008). “A Taxonomy of Runoff Methods,” Electoral Studies 27, no. 3: 395-399.

Laasko, Markku,, and Rein Taagepera (1979). “‘Effective’ Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe,” Comparative Political Studies 12, 1 (April): 3-27.

Marshall, Albert W., Ingram Olkin, and Friedrich Pukelsheim (2002). “A Majorization Comparison of Apportionment Methods in Proportional Representation,” Social Choice and Welfare 19, no 4 (October): 885-900.

Riker, William H. (1962). The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Shugart, Matthew Sobereg, and Rein Taagepera (1994). “Plurality Versus Majority Election of Presidents: A Proposal for a ‘Double Complement Rule,’” Comparative Political Studies 27, no. 3: 323-348.

Taagepera, Rein (2005). “Conservation of Balance in the Size of Parties,” Party Politics 11, no. 3: 283-298.