In 2010 this has become urgently important. The coalition government of Britain has promised a referendum on voting reform. But the only "reform" offered is likely to be the system called Alternative Voting. This is far more complicated than Approval Voting, and does not get rid of "the voter's dilemma". There is danger that the opportunity for real reform will be lost for a long time.

The Arithmetic of Voting

Click here to see the full text of this pamphlet.

The trouble with the "one person one vote" rule is that two candidates on one "side" divide it; some voters must agonize over whether to vote for the one they really prefer or the one who has more chancei—and both have less chance. After analysing three "solutions that don't work," we discover one that does: casting any number of single votes for different candidates.

This surprisingly simple "costless reform" turns out to have no real flaw and several other great advantages. This article (first written 1968, first published 1977) was the first statement of the idea and remains the most lucid and cogent short description. Later the idea was independently proposed by several other writers, and under the name of "approval voting" is the subject of a book and a draft bill. It is applicable to all kinds of elections, and might hold out hope for resolving the mess of the American and British electoral systems.

The 2000 U.S. presidential election (Gore-Nader-Bush) was an acute example of the "voters' dilemma" that this system would heal. A majority preferred Gore over Bush; but because a minority of them preferred Nader even more, Bush won.

As a public service, we offer this pamphlet at less than the cost of printing! Copies were sent (by Prof. John Flanigan of Hawaii and friends) to all members of the U.S. Congress.

6½ x 9½ in., 8 pages; diagrams. 1987; reprinted 1999, 2001, 2004. ISBN 978-0-934546-42-3.
$2.00

"Alternative voting" (also called "instant runoff voting" or "Ware's method") is a system in which voters are asked to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate gets rank 1 from a majority of voters, then the candidate with the smallest number of 1s is eliminated and that candidate's ballots are redistributed at full value to the remaining candidates according to the next ranking on each ballot. This process is repeated until one candidate gets a majority of votes among candidates not eliminated.
    Few voters will understand this. I can't remember what it is without going back to a written description. If voters cannot clearly picture the consequences of what they do, the process is not fully democratic.
    The system does not get rid of the "voter's dilemma".
    Consider the common situation in which A or B could win; you don't want A, but you really prefer C. Under Alternative Voting, you will still disadvantage B if you don't give it your first choice, you will still disadvantage C if you don't give it your first choice. There will still be some voters who opt one way, tactically, while others opt the other way, with their hearts, and the collective result of the division between those people will still be to hand the win to A, the one they all don't want. Any side that is divided will still, even if it is larger, lose. And the real extent of support for C will still be hidden.
    Alternative Voting is a form of our "second solution that doesn't work".