Elect Your Preferred Candidate to Represent Your Interests
Your Vote – use your vote to elect, not just to vote
Reformed First Past The Post, Reformed Alternative Vote and Reformed Single Transferable Vote election systems can ensure nearly every voter directly elects their preferred representative. This strong connection between voting intention and the election of preferred representatives is expected to increase voter turnout.
Before discussing our reformed voting systems, let’s take a short look at the history of voting and some current election system flaws in order to see how we can stimulate the motivation to vote.
Progression of Right to Vote and Right to Elect – we’ve come a long way but …
In the seventeen hundreds, the right to vote was limited to privileged groups in society. Advocates of full democracy favored and campaigned for universal adult suffrage. Today, nearly all modern governments provide universal adult suffrage. However, the right to elect personally chosen candidates is still quite limited because about 46% to 100% of electors normally fail to elect preferred candidates when virtually all of today’s most commonly used and widely known election systems are used to elect representatives to legislative assemblies.
Voting Limitations on the Right to Elect – present accepted systems to elect are all flawed
Currently, there are no effective and easily understood election systems to enable very large majorities of electors to personally elect candidates. For example, although first past the post (FPTP) and alternative vote (AV) election systems are quite understandable; they respectively normally enable only about 50% and 54%  of all electors to elect candidates of choice. Also by contrast, the single transferable vote (STV) election system can enable large majorities of electors to elect candidates of choice, but its’ complexity often forces electors into guessing who they elect with their votes. Furthermore, commonly used high election rate List Proportional Representation (List PR) election systems only enable electors to elect preferred parties of choice, not preferred party candidates of choice.
Disincentives to Vote – accepted systems ensure voters statistically fail to elect preferred candidates
High election failure rates can discourage substantial proportions of the voting population from voting. For example, consider:
- List PR voting systems. List PR ensures 100% of voters fail to directly elect preferred candidates of choice. This election failure rate can discourage those voters who want or prefer to elect party candidates of their own choosing from showing up to vote.
- FPTP voting systems. FPTP normally ensures about 50% or less of all voters fail to elect preferred representatives. This election failure rate result can discourage voters who do not expect to elect a preferred representative from casting their votes.
- AV voting systems. AV typically ensures about 46% or less of all voters fail to elect preferred representatives. Like FPTP, this election failure rate result creates a disincentive to vote.
- Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting systems. MMP generally combines the List PR voting system with FPTP or AV voting systems. The List PR component dilutes and reduces the total proportion of legislative assembly members that are elected as representatives of choice. As discussed above, this system contains all the disincentives for not voting that come with List PR, FPTP and AV election systems.
- STV voting systems. Small multi-member district (few politicians per district) voting systems ensure large proportions of voters fail to elect preferred representatives. For example, two-member districts ensure about 33% or less of all voters fail to elect a preferred representative. Again like FPTP, this election failure rate result creates a disincentive to vote. By contrast, large multi-member district (many politicians per district) voting systems can ensure very large proportions of voters elect preferred representatives. But the big problem with high election rate STV voting systems is complexity. This complexity may discourage people who yearn for simplicity from voting.
These currently utilised election systems are all flawed. But there are solutions that can enable you and all other electors to directly elect your candidates of personal choice to the legislature much more often at a statistically higher rate every time elections are held.
Overlapping Election Districts System
For the first time in history, the US 1787 constitution introduced the overlapping election districts system on a massive scale. This constitution produced federal election districts that overlap smaller state election districts which in turn overlap smaller city election districts.
The overlapping election districts system concept, is a concept that can be employed to improve the quality of representative government. When overlapping election districts are combined to form a single overlapping election districts election system, they can enable large majorities of electors to directly elect preferred candidates. In some overlapping election districts voting systems, the election success rate approaches 100%. This election success rate makes proportional representation close to perfect.
FPTP, AV and STV Election Methods
Overlapping election districts systems can be utilized by many recognized election methods. These include the FPTP, AV and STV election methods for increasing the ability of each elector to elect a candidate. FPTP and AV candidates are respectively elected to single-member districts by the most votes and by an absolute majority of votes. By contrast STV candidates are elected to multi-member districts by a quota of votes, which gets smaller as the number of representatives per district increases. On Election Day, STV and AV voters separately rank candidates from each overlapping election district on the ballot in order of preference whereas FPTP voters put a mark beside just one candidate from each overlapping election district on the ballot.
Reformed Election Systems
ElectionDistrictsVoting.com has three types of overlapping election districts election systems to enable large proportions of voters to directly elect preferred politicians of choice. They include:
- First Past The Post Proportional Representation (FPTP PR) election systems. These systems enable about 75% to about 94% or more voters to elect preferred candidates.
- Alternative Vote Proportional Representation (AV PR) election systems. These systems enable about 79% to about 96% or more voters to elect preferred candidates.
- Reformed Single Transferable Vote (Reformed STV) election systems. These systems enable about 89% to about 96% or more voters to elect preferred candidates. What’s more, large (many politicians per district) and complex multi-member districts are not required to obtain the high election rate results. The results are obtained from small (few politicians per district) and simple two and three-member districts.
FPTP PR election systems are the simplest and Reformed STV systems are the most complex.
The main difference between reformed and unreformed election system counterparts is the overlapping election districts reform. With overlapping districting reform, voters vote in local districts as usual and then in each overlapping district of residence on the ballot instead of voting in only one local district of residence. That’s basically all there is to enabling large proportions of voters to directly elect representatives of choice. It’s that simple.
Here’s how more voters elect. When voters fail to elect preferred candidates from a local first voting district of residence, they get a second chance to elect preferred candidates from a larger overlapping second voting district of residence. This voting process repeats itself for each additional overlapping election district on the ballot. As a result, voters have two or more chances to personally elect candidates of their own personal choosing.
As can be deduced, the voting process can ensure nearly all voters can elect candidates of their own personal choice to legislatures. High election success rates are expected to motivate larger proportions of voters to vote.
Overlapping election districts election systems make a big difference to the motivation to vote. For example, consider the FPTP PR four election chances model that enables about 94% or more voters to succeed in personally electing representatives. Only about 6% of voters fail to elect in this model in comparison to the present FPTP model where about 50% of voters typically fail to elect representatives of their own choosing. As a result, larger proportions of FPTP PR voters than FPTP voters are expected to vote.
Next Best Thing to Direct Democracy – in an increasingly partisan world, our voice is heard
FPTP PR, AV PR and Reformed STV may be the next best thing to direct democracy. In representative democracies, politicians make group decisions by voting on behalf of their constituents. In a direct democracy every person can help to make group decisions by voting on their own behalf. But when nearly every voter in a representative democracy elects a candidate of their own personal and therefore meaningful choice, people may feel that they are as close as they can get to making group decisions on their own behalf. In this reformed voting model voters are actually being represented, feel that their concerns are being represented and heard, and that their votes are making a difference. Also, when people know their votes are truly important in personally electing politicians, this can ignite more pride, interest and positive feelings about the legitimacy of government. As a result, people are much more inclined to care about what is going on politically and to go to the polls to vote.
Strengthening voter participation is really just a matter of common sense. We need to take away election failure rate disincentives, and create voter friendly incentives like the right for as many voters as possible to successfully elect candidates of personal choice every time they vote, which encourages more people to be active electors. Old voting systems have failed us, its time to reform them and enable real voting rights for each elector.
 The average election rate is obtained from a series of past state elections in New South Wales and Queensland in Australia where the method of voting is ‘Optional Preferential Voting’. Also, of further interest in New South Wales and Queensland, about 57% of the total valid vote of voters tends to express a voting preference for elected members of the legislative assembly.