Every day, around the world, millions of people vote and decide things; from leaders of local councils, to the head of the Catholic church, to the president of the United States. But these roles and choices, big or small, are decided by ballots in voting systems. However, these systems are not always fair and completely beneficial for everyone. They can twist the truth, not fully represent the true will of the people, and be unfair in ways you might not realize. So we are going to try to find the best voting system to solve this age-old problem. Let’s take a look at some.
Starting with the most common, we have “first past the post” voting. Each voter picks their favorite candidate, and the candidate with the most votes wins. This has some major flaws. If two similar candidates split the vote of the majority, a smaller candidate with no chance of winning can win. Also, voting for a smaller candidate can affect the outcome, just because voters can’t show that they like other candidates. People know smaller candidates can’t win, so they end up voting for a larger candidate they don’t care for, but would prefer over the other big candidate. This is what turns elections into just two party races.
Second, we have “approval” voting. Each voter picks all of the candidates they approve of, and the candidate with the most votes wins. This system improves on first past the post, but still comes with its own issues. First, you can’t express how much you like a candidate. This can often lead to widely accepted candidates to get the most votes. And, if you like all the candidates somewhat but not evenly, voting for all candidates won’t make a difference. This can become strategic, and not exactly show people’s true opinions.
Third, we have “instant runoff” voting. Each voter ranks every candidate, and each candidate starts with all of the votes that rank them number one. If there is no majority, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and all of their voters get their second choices spread out among the other candidates. This repeats until a candidate wins. This system is not really better than the previous two, as it has some glaring issues. Mainly the problem of candidates who could’ve won in approval voting getting eliminated early in the race. This system also carries the first past the post spoiler effect symptoms, which can drastically change the outcome.
Finally, we have “condorcet” voting. Each voter ranks every candidate, and each candidate goes head-to-head with every other candidate, by counting how many people rank one over the other. Whichever candidate is preferred to every other candidate wins.
This is what I haven’t told you this whole time; that there are no perfect systems. In 1951, a man named Kenneth Arrow published a paper titled “Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem.” It proved that, while following a set of fair, agreed upon rules, that there could be no ranked voting system that could meet all five criteria. Because a perfect formula doesn’t exist, we just have to choose what to give up.