Dictionary Definition
voting n : a choice that is made by voting;
"there were only 17 votes in favor of the motion" [syn: vote, ballot, balloting]
User Contributed Dictionary
English
Pronunciation
Verb form
voting- present participle of vote
Noun
- action of the verb to vote
Derived terms
Extensive Definition
Voting is a method for a group
such as a meeting or an
electorate to
make
a decision or express an opinion — often following
discussions, debates or
election
campaigns.
Process of voting
Most forms of democracy discern the will of the people by a common voting procedure:- Individual voter registration and qualification,
- Opening the Election for a set time period,
- Registration of voters at established voting locations,
- Distribution of ballots with preset candidates, issues, and choices (including the write-in option in some cases),
- Selection of preferred choices (often in secret, called a secret ballot),
- Secure collection of ballots for unbiased counting, and
- Proclamation of the will of the voters as the will of the people for their government.
Reasons for voting
In a democracy, voting commonly implies election, i.e. a way for an electorate to select among candidates for office. In politics voting is the method by which the electorate of a democracy appoints representatives in its government.A vote, is an individual's act of voting, by
which he or she express support or preference for a certain
motion (e.g. a proposed resolution), a certain candidate, or a
certain selection of candidates. A secret
ballot, the standard way to protect voters' political
privacy, generally takes place at a polling
station. The act of voting in most countries is voluntary,
however some countries, such as Australia,
Belgium and
Brazil, have
compulsory
voting systems.
Types of votes
Different voting systems use different types of vote. Suppose that the options in some election are Alice, Bob, Charlie, Daniel, and Emily and they are all vying for the same position.In a voting system that uses a single vote, the
voter can select one of the five that they most approve of.
"First
past the post" uses single votes. So, a voter might vote for
Charlie. This precludes him voting for anyone else.
An improvement on the single vote system is to
have run-off elections,
or repeat first past the post, however, the winner must win by 50%
plus one, called a simple majority. If subsequent votes must be
used, often a candidate, the one with the fewest votes or anyone
who wants to move their support to another candidate, is removed
from the ballot.
In a voting system that uses a multiple vote, the
voter can vote for any subset of the alternatives. So, a voter
might vote for Alice, Bob, and Charlie, rejecting Daniel and Emily.
Approval
voting uses such multiple votes.
In a voting system that uses a ranked vote, the
voter has to rank the alternatives in order of preference. For
example, they might vote for Bob in first place, then Emily, then
Alice, then Daniel, and finally Charlie. Many voting systems use
ranked votes.
In a voting system that uses a scored vote (or
range vote), the voter gives each alternative a number between one
and ten (the upper and lower bounds may vary). See range
voting.
Some "multiple-winner" systems may have a single
vote or one vote per elector per available position. In such a case
the elector could might vote for Bob and Charlie on a ballot with
two votes. However, if James and Jiggles each receive the most
votes (1st and 2nd place plurality), then Jiggles and James would
obtain the seats. These types of systems can use ranked or unranked
voting, and are often used for at-large positions
such as on some city councils.
Fair voting
Economist Kenneth Arrow lists five characteristics of a fair voting system. However, Arrow's impossibility theorem shows that it is impossible for any voting system which offers more than three options per question to have all 5 characteristics at the same time.Casting a vote expresses an implied willingness
to participate in a common process with some shared outcome. Those
who feel unable to express their limits or boundaries of tolerance
in a voting system may be more likely to resist or fight or fail to
support decisions made through it (more of an issue with parties
or policies). Those who feel unable to express their real
preferences may lack all enthusiasm for the choices or for the
eventually chosen representative or leader. Any vote balances
both kinds of considerations.
One common issue, especially in
first-past-the-post systems, is that of the protest
vote: one might "waste one's vote" on a minor party to send a
signal of strong preference for a candidate or party that cannot
win, or of intolerance for the "more mainstream" options. However
it is difficult to tell from the vote alone whether one is
positively inclined to the minor party or negatively inclined to
the major party. Previously Russia offered its electors a "None of
the Above" option, so that protest votes could be properly
tallied. Other jurisdictions may record the incidence of
(apparently deliberately) spoiled
ballot papers.
Also, it is often not clear whether the voter
really understands how his or her vote is counted in the voting
system, especially with the more complex types. This often leads to
issues with the results. Ballot
design and the use of voting
machines have particular importance, given this issue.
Optimally participants in a vote should perceive the results,
especially of a political vote, as fair. If fairness appears
lacking, resistance to the results may lead at best to confusion,
at worst to violence
and even civil war, in
the case of political rivals.
In an effort to make balloting cheaper and more
transparent, Brazil introduced
electronic
voting in all levels of elections, gradually since 1994. By
2002 general elections, all voting in Brazil was cast on electronic
system, with paper ballots being used only in last case emergencies
(such as black-outs). Argentina
followed in 2003 for a gubernatorial election. This pilot test
involved 500,000 voters distributed among 20 constituencies in the
eastern Argentine province of Buenos
Aires. However, concerns over the security of
paperless voting machines have caused controversy, particularly
in the United States.
Criteria. It may be premature to choose the best
method of voting without deciding the criteria by which the methods
are to be judged. The criterion most commonly accepted is that the
method should choose the candidate or policy that would defeat all
others in a series of individual contests. This is what our usual
balloting system does, looking only at the voter’s positive
choices. Pairwise comparisons is a good implementation of that
aim.
Maybe that should not be the sole criterion,
however. Another possible goal would be to protect minorities from
what has been called the “militant majority.” A town meeting is one
implementation of democracy that often does this. Such a meeting
would probably not choose the initially most popular candidate if
that candidate was totally unacceptable to a significant minority.
A candidate would probably be chosen who had slightly fewer
supporters but many fewer enemies. A blackball or veto provision
also protects minority rights, though at great cost to majority
rule.
It may be desirable then that an ideal voting
system should consider who people oppose as well as who they
support. These are not mirror images of each other. The decision
makers have latitudes of acceptance, indifference, and rejection,
and these may differ in their widths. Many alternatives may fall in
the latitude of indifference - they are neither accepted nor
rejected. Avoiding the choice that the most people strongly reject
may sometimes be at least as important as choosing the one that
they most favor.
Voting and Information
Modern political science has questioned whether average citizens have sufficient political information to cast meaningful votes. A series of studies coming out of the University of Michigan in the 1950s and 1960s argued that voters lack a basic understanding of current issues, the liberal-conservative ideological dimension, and the relative ideological positions of the major parties. Only a handful of sophisticated voters—usually those with education and high levels of political involvement—seemed to understand political debates fully.Though these studies arose from research in the
United States, their implications for democracy are severe.
However, these conclusions continue to be contested as current
scholarly research debates the Michigan studies' findings. A
consensus has begun to emerge that voters do not need the high
levels of political information that the Michigan studies expected
to find in order to participate fully in politics; instead, voters
learn to rely on "information shortcuts"—for example, they look at
which politicians and interest
groups endorse each side of a proposal to get a feel for
whether they ought to support it.
See also
References
External links
- The Canadian Museum of Civilization - A History of the Vote in Canada
- Can I Vote? - a nonpartisan US resource for registering to vote and finding your polling place from the National Association of Secretaries of State.
- A history of voting in the United States from the Smithsonian Institution.
voting in Catalan: Vot
voting in Czech: Hlasování
voting in Danish: Afstemning
voting in German: Abstimmung
(Stellungnahme)
voting in Estonian: Hääletus
voting in Modern Greek (1453-): Ψηφοφορία
voting in Spanish: Voto (elecciones)
voting in French: Vote
voting in Galician: Voto
voting in Korean: 투표
voting in Italian: Voto (politica)
voting in Dutch: Stemming (verkiezingen)
voting in Japanese: 投票
voting in Polish: Głosowanie
voting in Portuguese: Votação
voting in Russian: Голосование
voting in Sicilian: Vutazzioni
voting in Simple English: Voting
voting in Finnish: Äänestys
voting in Swedish: Votering
voting in Urdu: رائے دہندگی
voting in Vietnamese: Đầu phiếu
voting in Chinese: 投票
voting in Turkish: Oy verme
Synonyms, Antonyms and Related Words
Australian ballot, Hare system, PR, absentee voting, association, aye, ballot, ballot-box stuffing,
canvass, canvassing, card voting,
casting vote, cochairmanship, colonization, complicity, condominium, contribution, copartnership, copartnery, cotenancy, counting heads,
cumulative system, cumulative voting, deciding vote, division, election fraud,
enfranchisement,
engagement, fagot
vote, floating,
franchise, graveyard
vote, hand vote, having a part, involvement, joint
chairmanship, joint control, joint ownership, joint tenancy, list
system, nay, no, nontransferable vote, partaking, participation, partnership, plebiscite, plebiscitum, plumper, plural system, plural
vote, poll, polling, preferential system,
preferential voting, proportional representation, proxy, proxy voting, record vote,
referendum, repeating, representation, right to
vote, rising vote, say,
secret ballot, sharing,
show of hands, single system, single transferrable vote, single
vote, single-member district, snap vote, straw vote, suffrage, transferable vote,
viva voce, voice, voice
vote, vote, voting machine,
voting right, write-in, write-in vote, yea, yeas and nays, yes