Preferential Voting

[Guest Dave Cahn]

In the 10th Edition (I can't find my 11th, but the matter in question is not on the list of changes), Article XIII, Section 45 includes an illustrative example of a method of preferential voting. It includes the following: "If a ballot having one or more names not marked with any numeral comes up for placement at any stage of the counting and all of its marked names have been eliminated, it should not be placed in any pile, but should be set aside." That suggestion has two conditions, (1) the ballot has one or more names not marked with any numeral, and (2) all of its marked names have been eliminated.

The question occurs as to what should be done if condition (1) is met, but not (2). For example, a ballot could show no first place choice, but could have names marked to indicate the voter's second or subsequent choice that is still in the running. I can tink of several ways to handle this, but was any particular way contemplated by the drafters of the illustration? If not, how would you suggest the ballot be handled?

[Josh Martin]

In the 10th Edition (I can't find my 11th, but the matter in question is not on the list of changes), Article XIII, Section 45 includes an illustrative example of a method of preferential voting. It includes the following: "If a ballot having one or more names not marked with any numeral comes up for placement at any stage of the counting and all of its marked names have been eliminated, it should not be placed in any pile, but should be set aside." That suggestion has two conditions, (1) the ballot has one or more names not marked with any numeral, and (2) all of its marked names have been eliminated.

The question occurs as to what should be done if condition (1) is met, but not (2). For example, a ballot could show no first place choice, but could have names marked to indicate the voter's second or subsequent choice that is still in the running. I can tink of several ways to handle this, but was any particular way contemplated by the drafters of the illustration? If not, how would you suggest the ballot be handled?

In my opinion, no, the situation you are describing is not addressed by the language you have cited (or by the equivalent language in the 11th edition, found on pg. 427, lines 19-22). I can't speak to whether the drafters of the illustration had any particular method in mind, but if they did, it does not appear to be in the text.

As to how such a ballot should be handled, I would suggest that the meaning is doubtful and to follow RONR, 11th ed., pg. 416, lines 12-19 - that is, it should be treated as an illegal vote if it could not affect the result, and if it could affect the result, the case should be decided by the assembly, with the teller's committee taking care not to show how the decision would affect the candidates.

Also, I think it is important to note that the facts of the individual case are quite significant. A ballot which has no candidate marked as the first choice but is otherwise marked regularly suggests something much different than a ballot which has no first choice and has, for instance, two or three candidates marked as the second choice.

[Tim Wynn]

For example, a ballot could show no first place choice, but could have names marked to indicate the voter's second or subsequent choice . . .

Whaaaat?

You mean like, I have no first choice for Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role, but my second choice is Meryl Streep; thIrd is Kirsten Dunst; fourth is Anne Hathaway; and fifth is Tobey Maguire?

In such a bizarre case, I'd say it's obvious that Meryl is the first choice, second is Kirsten, and so on.

[Josh Martin]

Whaaaat?

You mean like, I have no first choice for Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role, but my second choice is Meryl Streep; thIrd is Kirsten Dunst; fourth is Anne Hathaway; and fifth is Tobey Maguire?

In such a bizarre case, I'd say it's obvious that Meryl is the first choice, second is Kirsten, and so on.

Isn't it equally logical to conclude that the voter simply neglected to mark their first choice or something similar?

[Gary c Tesser]

What's bizarre is Kirsten Dunst ahead of Anne Hathaway.

[Shmuel Gerber]

What's bizarre is Kirsten Dunst ahead of Anne Hathaway.

I think Tobey Maguire might find other aspects of this scenario a bit more bizarre.

[Tim Wynn]

Isn't it equally logical to conclude that the voter simply neglected to mark their first choice or something similar?

I suspected the original poster's question was hypothetical and that the original poster felt this was a situation that might reasonably occur by design of a voter, so I crafted an example to express why it wouldn't.

To serve my own purposes, the example I gave made it clear that there was no first choice. Since a ballot containing only choices 2 through 5 with a name left blank contains a healthy share of mystery and ambiguity, the tellers would have to carefully weigh the situation and make a determination on the true meaning. If there is any uncertainty about the meaning, and if the ballot may affect the outcome, it is reported to the chair for the assembly to decide. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 409, ll. 16-20.