Electoral systems discussion

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122708840#Comment_122708840

Shorter terms and decoupled houses means you are in permanent election mode; which is exceptionally bad.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122709667#Comment_122709667

I was going to make this point. Look at the absolute shambles that is the US...

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122497204#Comment_122497204

Let's use AI to decipher handwriting and sort out the spoilt votes. :rolleyes:

The temptation to cheat is real.

Commercial eVoting systems aren't secure in the face of what Ireland's EU veto could be worth to foreign government or multinationals.

In 1987 the Dáil was split 82:82 before the Ceann Comhairle cast in favour of Haughey. Dick Spring held on to his seat by 4 votes in that one.

Crowdstrke showed that the most secure level of the windows operating system isn't secure. Sinkclose is a vulnerability in CPU's.

Tallymen and women all the way.

Capt'n Midnight

The Tory party elections for leader yet again shows why STV is demonstrably better than most of the alternatives.

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122709363#Comment_122709363

No one has made any real good reasons not to, all they have pointed to is that legislation change (if required) takes time, but in reality if that is the case then you would have to seriously consider a 7 year term over a 5 year term.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122709667#Comment_122709667

Again New Zealand has a 3 year term, has this cause major issues with their election time table.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122709582#Comment_122709582

I am not suggesting fix term parliaments, I think no confidence is a good thing. My point in relation to that is with local government and the EU parliment were there is rarely an option to call a snap election. I think 5 years in this case is too long, 4 years is better, particularly in elections that don't really get into election mode except for the month in the leading up.

I agree that the lead up to general elections is a shambles, the media lately seem to only care about when the next election is, but that is not the fault of the system rather the journalist and to an extend the politicians, where any change to any scheduled debate is considered a sign of an early election.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710027#Comment_122710027

If you look at the MPs voting part of the contest overall it wasn't too far off from a STV contest (it certainly wasn't FPTP anyway).

They got to vote for who they wanted and then they got to give further preferences. At the end of each stage the lowest ranked candidate was eliminated. The only difference is that they didn't have to select all of their preferences on the one ballot in one casting.

Cleverley getting knocked out wasn't the fault of the voting system. The root cause of it was that the contest that the MPs participated did not select the winner. Instead it finished with 2 candidates remaining at which point they lost control of who would ultimately be selected. That created an opportunity for tactical voting.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that when executed well. Boris Johnson's team used this tactic ruthlessly in the 2019 contest to ensure that it was Jeremy Hunt that he would face in the run-off rather than Michael Gove.

The problem this time was that Cleverley's team made a monumental cock-up. If you're going to lend some of your supporters to a favoured opponent then you have to be damn sure that you have the rest of your vote locked up. They didn't and it'll be something that'll be used as a cautionary tale for decades to come.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711087#Comment_122711087

You can consider anything you like, but if you've going to propose legislative change, you need a good reason for doing so.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711324#Comment_122711324

Yes is was sort of like STV , with the crucial differences that they got to change the transfers between each round and 100% of the votes were transferable rather than ones for eliminated candidates.

If MPs hadn't changed voting intentions then it would be similar to STV, but they did trying to second guess each other.

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711570#Comment_122711570

I can only try convince people that a 5 year term for councils is slightly too long. The same goes large for the seanad and the EU Parliament.

In New Zealand

Both Prime Minister John Key and Opposition leader David Shearer expressed support for an extension of the parliamentary term to four years. The main argument put forward in support of a longer term is that "Governments need time to establish and then implement new policies".

Seems to me they really need a 5 year term in NZ rather than a 3 year one. Not a great reason for a proposed legislative change really. But I support them in trying to get a 4 year term.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712032#Comment_122712032

The first step in convincing people is to show them the benefits. Over to you…

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712088#Comment_122712088

I will let the NZ politicians do that :)

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711087#Comment_122711087

If you've seen recent NZ politics you'd see 3 as too short. Country is a mess and each government spends its term undoing the previous one and bugger all else.

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712542#Comment_122712542

And here was me thinking that Ardern was the poster PM who saved NZ, seems she just didn't get enough time.

As I say I think 3 years is not enough, but should they go 5 over 4 years?

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712676#Comment_122712676

5 works fine

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711087#Comment_122711087

And yet again we ask… why is four years better?

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712032#Comment_122712032

You are taking the mick. We have a five year term and you're saying it's too long. Then you say NZ "really needs" a five year term. OK Jan. 🙄

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712844#Comment_122712844

I am taking the mick.

NZ currently have a 3 year term which I think is too short. I doubt I have to explain why I think that is too short.

NZ would like a 4 year term, which I think is plenty of time and I agree with them.

Ireland currently has a 5 year term which I think is too long. But I must write a thesis as to why I think this is too long, yet if I told an NZer that I think that they should go with a 5 year term, that would be the end no need for a discussion.

Do you not see the irony?

Peregrinus

I don't think you can discuss the question of the term of the Dáil (or any other legislature) separately from the question of whether you're talking about a maximum term or a fixed term.

Five years is the maximum term for Dáil Éireann, and that has been the maximum since the foundation of the state. But we are currently in the 33rd Dáil Éireann; it doesn't take a mathematical genius to work out that the average period between elections is 3 years and 2 months. If you were to reduce the maximum term to four years then the average term would likely be even that 3 years and 2 months.

Most democracies, in fact, have fixed-term parliaments. Ireland does not and the UK does not, but we in the minority. In general, shorter term limits are associated with fixed-term parliaments. Unless you're advocating fixed terms in Ireland, you'd want to think hard before reducing the maximum term.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122712542#Comment_122712542

Or maybe they should change to a less adversarial system and go for consensus to save all very expensive U-turns ?

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122714676#Comment_122714676

As I say start with Local Government and talk to Europe about reducing it to 4 years. Both of these terms are fixed 5 year terms. Later consider as I say a fixed term 4 year Seanad but remove the Senators appointed by the Taoiseach. Reform of Seanad is required.

Also while you may want to go back to the start of state, almost all governments have looked to remain in place for a full term. Take govs since 1997: -

pd/ff - 5 years

pd/ff - 5 years

pd/ff/gp - 3 years 9 months

lp/fg - 5 years

fg/ff support - 4 years 1 month

current gov - most likely 5 years, though looks like it might be cut short

So only 2 of the governments took early elections.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122715084#Comment_122715084

It's not worth doing anything with the seanad, it's utterly powerless and the Dail will never cede any power to it. Only changes that should be made is to make it cheaper to run and operate.

5 years is about right, gives time for policies to be enacted and take effect. Asking others to prove your hypothesis for you would indicate your hypothesis is wrong.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122715084#Comment_122715084

Well, that's two out of five, which is a fairly high strike rate.

Mostly, voters don't like early elections, so there is a political price to be paid for holding one. Probably there's about a three to six month period at the end of your term where an election wouldn't be considered "early", just advantageously timed, which the voters will mostly tolerate. Going much more than six months before your time is either something that is forced upon you — you've lost a vote of confidence; your coalition has fallen apart — or it's a big gamble.

zv2

The not Sinn Fein party looks promising.

Manic Moran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122683122#Comment_122683122

Final score in Alaska.

Repeal: 159,955

Keep: 160,619

As it's within 0.5%, a recount has been requested.

However, the concept was shot down almost everywhere it was put on the ballot this year, exception of D.C.

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/31/nx-s1-5174185/open-primary-ranked-choice-voting-citizens-ballot-measures

Of note, open primaries failed in fairly blue Oregon, which is bordered by open primary California. Also of note is Nevada going bi-partisan in favour of showing ID to vote.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122890474#Comment_122890474

Yeah disappointing night for RCV advocates - especially the resounding defeats in blue states like Oregon and Colorado.

I was keeping an eye on the incremental progress of that Alaska race last week. It was quite the nail biter. With it being so close there is every likelihood that the state Republicans will once again try and revoke it in 2026. However their case may be weakened somewhat by the fact that their candidate, Begich, was able to win back the House seat. Also every election cycle that it survives, the voters get more used to it and realise that no, it's not that complicated - which is the other main argument used by the opponents of it.

Hotblack Desiato

Is "you voters are too thick to understand this" really a winning argument anyway?

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122891808#Comment_122891808

Defeated the AV referendum in the UK

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122891808#Comment_122891808

Our PR/STV is simplicity itself for the voter - put the candidates in the order of your choice as far as you wish, but do not make any other marks on your ballot.

It only gets complicated when politicians try to game the system by trying to get more elected than a straight count of voters preference would give. The number of candidates put forward for a party can have a significant effect on the result - particularly if geographic support is important, but of course that relies on party loyalty.

Brussels Sprout

RCV is a pretty simplistic system (especially compared to PR-STV) but by god are the yanks making it more confusing than it needs to be.

Here's an example of official results from an Alaskan legislative race this year where 4 candidates are going for one seat:

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122892773#Comment_122892773

It can be simple or it can be complicated. My sequence of voting depends significantly on the likelihood of the candidate staying or not staying in the count. Specifically, I can afford to give higher preferences to some candidates, because I know they haven't a hope in hell of staying in, and my vote will travel to another candidate who needs it to get elected.