候选人的胜率和德洪德杰夫森系统中的席位受到威胁

Q3 Social Sciences
Decyzje Pub Date : 2017-06-15 DOI:10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.87
Przemysław Remin, Tomasz Tarczyński
{"title":"候选人的胜率和德洪德杰夫森系统中的席位受到威胁","authors":"Przemysław Remin, Tomasz Tarczyński","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.87","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The inspiration for writing this article was a relatively high number of invalid ballots in Poland’s local government election in 2014. We wanted to answer the following question: what might happen to a seat won in the d'Hondt-Jefferson electoral system if the invalid ballots were originally valid. We were interested in over-voted ballots, where one choice could be originally marked by a voter and other choices added by a biased commission. Would the number of such invalid ballots be potentially high enough to change the election result, if they were assigned to other parties as valid votes? Fundamental for weighing the influence of invalid ballots on the results of a contested election is the margin of victory of the winning candidate. The margin of victory is easy to calculate for a single-member district election method but in a d’Hondt-Jefferson method, it is complex and requires simulation of the whole system, by adding additional votes to different parties. We propose a method of operating the candidate’s margin of victory as the smallest number of additional votes needed by other competing parties to take that seat. For every seat, we introduce the indicator l as the ratio of the margin of victory and the number of invalid ballots. The indicator l allows for some assessment if the seat is being threatened by invalid ballots. The higher the value of the indicator, the more vulnerable the seat is. At a value of l lower than one, the seat is safe, as invalid ballots in any configuration, may not give it to other parties. We demonstrate the calculation of the margin of victory and the indicator l on the example of Poland’s local government elections to county councils conducted in 2014, where the seats are distributed by the d'Hondt-Jefferson method. Almost 17% of the votes were invalid at that time. Since there were no statistics on over-voted ballots we have assumed all invalid ballots could be originally valid and might be cast to any party. That drove us to a conclusion that 47% of all mandates were threatened. The defined margin of victory and the indicator l may be of practical use in resolving electoral protests by the courts, as they give a glimpse of the likelihood of changing the election outcome.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":"14 1","pages":"89-106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Margines zwycięstwa kandydata i mandaty zagrożone w systemie d'Hondta-Jeffersona\",\"authors\":\"Przemysław Remin, Tomasz Tarczyński\",\"doi\":\"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.87\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The inspiration for writing this article was a relatively high number of invalid ballots in Poland’s local government election in 2014. We wanted to answer the following question: what might happen to a seat won in the d'Hondt-Jefferson electoral system if the invalid ballots were originally valid. We were interested in over-voted ballots, where one choice could be originally marked by a voter and other choices added by a biased commission. Would the number of such invalid ballots be potentially high enough to change the election result, if they were assigned to other parties as valid votes? Fundamental for weighing the influence of invalid ballots on the results of a contested election is the margin of victory of the winning candidate. The margin of victory is easy to calculate for a single-member district election method but in a d’Hondt-Jefferson method, it is complex and requires simulation of the whole system, by adding additional votes to different parties. We propose a method of operating the candidate’s margin of victory as the smallest number of additional votes needed by other competing parties to take that seat. For every seat, we introduce the indicator l as the ratio of the margin of victory and the number of invalid ballots. The indicator l allows for some assessment if the seat is being threatened by invalid ballots. The higher the value of the indicator, the more vulnerable the seat is. At a value of l lower than one, the seat is safe, as invalid ballots in any configuration, may not give it to other parties. We demonstrate the calculation of the margin of victory and the indicator l on the example of Poland’s local government elections to county councils conducted in 2014, where the seats are distributed by the d'Hondt-Jefferson method. Almost 17% of the votes were invalid at that time. Since there were no statistics on over-voted ballots we have assumed all invalid ballots could be originally valid and might be cast to any party. That drove us to a conclusion that 47% of all mandates were threatened. The defined margin of victory and the indicator l may be of practical use in resolving electoral protests by the courts, as they give a glimpse of the likelihood of changing the election outcome.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37255,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Decyzje\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"89-106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Decyzje\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.87\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decyzje","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.87","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

写这篇文章的灵感来自2014年波兰地方政府选举中相对较多的无效选票。我们想回答以下问题:如果无效选票最初是有效的,那么在德洪德杰夫森选举制度中赢得的席位会发生什么。我们对过度投票感兴趣,其中一个选择最初可以由选民标记,其他选择则由有偏见的委员会添加。如果这些无效选票被分配给其他政党作为有效选票,那么这些无效选票的数量是否可能高到足以改变选举结果?衡量无效选票对有争议选举结果影响的基本因素是获胜候选人的胜率。单成员地区选举方法的胜差很容易计算,但在d’Hondt-Jefferson方法中,它很复杂,需要通过向不同政党添加额外选票来模拟整个系统。我们提出了一种方法,将候选人的胜率计算为其他竞争政党获得该席位所需的最小额外票数。对于每个席位,我们引入了指标l,即获胜幅度与无效选票数量的比率。如果该席位受到无效选票的威胁,指标l允许进行一些评估。该指标的值越高,该席位就越容易受到攻击。当l值低于1时,该席位是安全的,因为任何配置的无效选票都可能不会给其他政党。我们以2014年举行的波兰地方政府县议会选举为例,展示了胜率和指标l的计算,其中席位通过d’Hondt-Jefferson方法分配。当时几乎17%的选票无效。由于没有关于超额投票的统计数据,我们假设所有无效选票最初都是有效的,可能会投给任何一方。这促使我们得出结论,47%的授权受到威胁。确定的胜率和指标l可能对解决法院的选举抗议有实际用处,因为它们可以让我们看到改变选举结果的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Margines zwycięstwa kandydata i mandaty zagrożone w systemie d'Hondta-Jeffersona
The inspiration for writing this article was a relatively high number of invalid ballots in Poland’s local government election in 2014. We wanted to answer the following question: what might happen to a seat won in the d'Hondt-Jefferson electoral system if the invalid ballots were originally valid. We were interested in over-voted ballots, where one choice could be originally marked by a voter and other choices added by a biased commission. Would the number of such invalid ballots be potentially high enough to change the election result, if they were assigned to other parties as valid votes? Fundamental for weighing the influence of invalid ballots on the results of a contested election is the margin of victory of the winning candidate. The margin of victory is easy to calculate for a single-member district election method but in a d’Hondt-Jefferson method, it is complex and requires simulation of the whole system, by adding additional votes to different parties. We propose a method of operating the candidate’s margin of victory as the smallest number of additional votes needed by other competing parties to take that seat. For every seat, we introduce the indicator l as the ratio of the margin of victory and the number of invalid ballots. The indicator l allows for some assessment if the seat is being threatened by invalid ballots. The higher the value of the indicator, the more vulnerable the seat is. At a value of l lower than one, the seat is safe, as invalid ballots in any configuration, may not give it to other parties. We demonstrate the calculation of the margin of victory and the indicator l on the example of Poland’s local government elections to county councils conducted in 2014, where the seats are distributed by the d'Hondt-Jefferson method. Almost 17% of the votes were invalid at that time. Since there were no statistics on over-voted ballots we have assumed all invalid ballots could be originally valid and might be cast to any party. That drove us to a conclusion that 47% of all mandates were threatened. The defined margin of victory and the indicator l may be of practical use in resolving electoral protests by the courts, as they give a glimpse of the likelihood of changing the election outcome.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Decyzje
Decyzje Social Sciences-Law
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信