Enter a player name to begin or load your saved progress.
The Single Transferable Vote (STV) system is designed exclusively for single-winner elections.
Answer: False
Explanation: STV is fundamentally designed for multi-winner elections, aiming to achieve proportional representation by allocating seats based on voters' ranked preferences.
In STV, a voter casts only one vote, which is always counted for their first-ranked candidate.
Answer: False
Explanation: While a voter casts a single ballot, the vote is not always counted for the first-ranked candidate. Votes are transferred based on subsequent preferences if the initial choice is elected with a surplus or eliminated.
STV aims to achieve proportional representation by ensuring the proportion of seats won closely matches the proportion of votes received.
Answer: True
Explanation: A primary objective of STV is to achieve proportional representation, meaning the distribution of seats in a legislature reflects the overall distribution of votes cast by the electorate.
A ranked ballot in STV allows voters to select multiple candidates without indicating preference order.
Answer: False
Explanation: A ranked ballot in STV requires voters to indicate their preference order for candidates (e.g., 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice), which is essential for the vote transfer process.
What is the core principle of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system?
Answer: Voters rank candidates on a ballot, allowing votes to be transferred if initial choices are surplus or eliminated.
Explanation: The fundamental principle of STV involves voters ranking candidates on a ballot, enabling their votes to be transferred according to these preferences if their initial choices are elected with a surplus or are eliminated.
How does STV primarily achieve proportional representation?
Answer: By ensuring multi-member districts and transferring votes to reflect diverse electorate preferences.
Explanation: STV achieves proportional representation through the use of multi-member districts and a system of vote transfers, which allows the distribution of seats to more accurately mirror the electorate's diverse preferences.
What is the function of a ranked ballot in the STV system?
Answer: It guides the transfer of votes based on the voter's order of preference.
Explanation: The ranked ballot in STV serves as the mechanism to direct the transfer of votes, ensuring that a voter's preferences are considered throughout the counting process, even if their first choice is elected or eliminated.
The 'quota' in STV represents the maximum number of votes a candidate can receive.
Answer: False
Explanation: The quota in STV represents the minimum number of votes required for a candidate to be elected, not the maximum.
The Hare quota is calculated by dividing the total valid votes by the number of seats to fill.
Answer: False
Explanation: The Hare quota is calculated by dividing the total valid votes by the number of seats to fill plus one (V / (S + 1)).
Surplus votes in STV are votes a candidate receives above the required quota.
Answer: True
Explanation: Surplus votes are defined as the votes a candidate receives that exceed the calculated quota needed for election.
Surplus votes in STV are transferred to other candidates based on the voters' next preferences.
Answer: True
Explanation: The mechanism of STV involves transferring surplus votes from elected candidates to other candidates according to the next preferences indicated on the ballots.
If a candidate reaches the quota in the first round of an STV count, their surplus votes are simply discarded.
Answer: False
Explanation: Surplus votes from a candidate elected in the first round are transferred to other candidates based on the voters' subsequent preferences, rather than being discarded.
When the least popular candidate is eliminated in STV, their votes are transferred to the next-preferred candidate marked on each ballot.
Answer: True
Explanation: The elimination of a candidate in STV involves transferring their votes to the next-preferred candidate indicated on each ballot, provided that candidate is still in the running.
The Gregory method for transferring surplus votes is a simpler, non-fractional approach.
Answer: False
Explanation: The Gregory method is characterized by its fractional transfer of surplus votes, calculated proportionally based on the distribution of preferences, distinguishing it from simpler, potentially non-fractional methods.
An 'exhausted vote' in STV is a ballot that cannot be transferred further because all ranked candidates are already elected or eliminated, or too few preferences were marked.
Answer: True
Explanation: An exhausted vote in STV refers to a ballot that cannot be further transferred because all candidates listed by the voter have either been elected, eliminated, or the ballot did not contain sufficient preferences.
The Droop quota is generally higher than the Hare quota.
Answer: False
Explanation: The Droop quota is typically lower than the Hare quota, calculated as the smallest integer greater than V/(S+1), which generally requires fewer votes to achieve election.
The 'modified d'Hondt electoral system' is a variant of STV that includes an electoral threshold.
Answer: True
Explanation: The modified d'Hondt system is described as a variation of STV that incorporates an electoral threshold, requiring parties to achieve a minimum vote percentage to be eligible for representation.
What is a 'quota' in the STV electoral system?
Answer: The minimum number of votes required for a candidate to be elected.
Explanation: In STV, a quota represents the threshold or minimum number of votes a candidate must achieve to be declared elected.
How are 'surplus votes' handled in the STV counting process?
Answer: They are transferred to other candidates based on the voters' next preferences.
Explanation: Surplus votes, which are votes exceeding the quota, are transferred to other candidates according to the next preferences indicated on the ballots, ensuring these votes contribute to further election outcomes.
What happens to the votes of a candidate eliminated in STV?
Answer: They are transferred to the next-preferred candidate marked on each ballot.
Explanation: When a candidate is eliminated in STV, their votes are transferred to the next-preferred candidate indicated on each ballot, provided that candidate is still in contention.
Which of the following is a primary difference between the Gregory method and simpler methods of surplus transfer in STV?
Answer: The Gregory method transfers votes fractionally based on preference proportions, aiming for precision.
Explanation: The Gregory method is distinguished by its fractional transfer of surplus votes, calculated based on the distribution of preferences among the remaining candidates, thereby aiming for greater precision compared to simpler, potentially non-fractional or random, transfer methods.
What constitutes an 'exhausted vote' in STV?
Answer: A ballot that cannot be transferred further because all ranked candidates are out of the running or too few preferences were marked.
Explanation: An exhausted vote in STV refers to a ballot that cannot be further transferred because all candidates listed by the voter have either been elected, eliminated, or the ballot did not contain sufficient preferences.
What is the 'modified d'Hondt electoral system' described as in relation to STV?
Answer: A variant of STV that includes an electoral threshold.
Explanation: The modified d'Hondt electoral system is identified as a variant of STV that incorporates an electoral threshold, requiring parties to meet a minimum vote percentage to gain representation.
First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) systems, unlike STV, can allow a single party to win all seats in a district even without an overwhelming majority.
Answer: True
Explanation: FPTP's winner-take-all nature in single-member districts can lead to disproportionate outcomes, where a party can secure a majority of seats with less than a majority of the total vote, a phenomenon STV aims to prevent.
Single Non-Transferable Vote (SNTV) involves voters ranking multiple candidates.
Answer: False
Explanation: SNTV, unlike STV, typically involves voters casting a single vote for one candidate and does not utilize ranked ballots or complex vote transfers.
Plurality block voting, unlike STV, can lead to highly unrepresentative results where a majority of voters elect all representatives from one party.
Answer: True
Explanation: Plurality block voting, particularly in multi-member districts, can result in a situation where a party securing a simple majority of votes wins all available seats, leading to significant disproportionality compared to STV.
Instant-Runoff Voting (IRV) is the multi-winner version of STV.
Answer: False
Explanation: Instant-Runoff Voting (IRV) is the single-winner analogue of STV, whereas STV is specifically designed for multi-winner elections.
Ticket voting in STV allows voters to rank individual candidates in order of preference.
Answer: False
Explanation: Ticket voting in STV allows voters to express a preference for a party's slate of candidates, rather than ranking individual candidates directly.
Party-list proportional representation, unlike STV, allows voters to directly influence the order of candidates elected.
Answer: False
Explanation: STV allows voters to directly influence the order of candidates elected through ranked preferences, whereas party-list PR typically assigns candidates based on party-determined lists.
Indirect STV involves citizens voting directly for representatives using ranked ballots.
Answer: False
Explanation: Indirect STV refers to a system where an elected body votes for another body using STV. Direct citizen voting with ranked ballots is characteristic of standard STV, not indirect STV.
Which statement accurately contrasts STV with First-Past-the-Post (FPTP)?
Answer: FPTP can lead to a single party winning all seats with less than a majority, while STV promotes broader representation.
Explanation: FPTP, in its single-member district, winner-take-all format, can result in disproportionate outcomes where a minority of the total vote secures a majority of seats. STV, conversely, aims for proportionality and broader representation through multi-member districts and vote transfers.
How does STV differ from the Single Non-Transferable Vote (SNTV) system?
Answer: STV involves complex vote transfers, while SNTV does not.
Explanation: A key distinction is that STV employs ranked ballots and complex vote transfers to achieve proportionality, whereas SNTV typically involves single votes without the transfer mechanism.
How does STV compare to 'party-list proportional representation' regarding voter influence?
Answer: STV allows voters to directly influence individual candidate selection, unlike party-list PR.
Explanation: STV empowers voters to directly influence the selection and order of individual candidates through ranked preferences, a level of direct influence typically not afforded in party-list proportional representation systems where parties control candidate order.
Thomas Hare is credited with independently developing and advocating for STV in the mid-19th century.
Answer: True
Explanation: Thomas Hare is widely recognized for his independent development and advocacy of the Single Transferable Vote system, particularly his influential work published in 1857.
Catherine Helen Spence proposed using STV for single-member districts.
Answer: False
Explanation: Catherine Helen Spence was instrumental in adapting Thomas Hare's STV proposal for use in multi-member districts, rather than single-member districts.
Australia, Ireland, and Malta currently use STV for their national legislatures.
Answer: True
Explanation: The provided information indicates that Australia (for its Senate), Ireland, and Malta employ STV for elections to their national legislative bodies.
Tasmania was the first parliament in the world to be partially elected using STV, adopting the Hare-Clark system in 1896.
Answer: True
Explanation: Tasmania's adoption of the Hare-Clark system in 1896 marked a significant milestone, making it the first parliament globally to utilize STV for partial elections.
The Australian Senate has used STV to elect Senators since 1948.
Answer: True
Explanation: The Australian Senate has employed the STV system for the election of its Senators since 1948, contributing to a diverse representation of political parties.
In 2016, Australia's Senate STV system abolished optional preferential voting.
Answer: False
Explanation: In 2016, Australia's Senate STV system abolished 'group voting tickets' (GVTs), not optional preferential voting. The reform aimed to reduce party influence over preference allocation.
BC-STV was successfully implemented in British Columbia after a referendum in 2005.
Answer: False
Explanation: Although BC-STV received majority support in a 2005 referendum, it failed to meet the required threshold for implementation and was later defeated in a subsequent referendum in 2009.
Who is widely recognized for independently developing and advocating for the STV system in 1857?
Answer: Thomas Hare
Explanation: Thomas Hare is widely credited with independently developing and advocating for the Single Transferable Vote system, publishing his influential work in 1857.
Which countries are mentioned as currently using STV for their national legislatures?
Answer: Australia, Ireland, and Malta
Explanation: The provided information identifies Australia (for its Senate), Ireland, and Malta as countries currently utilizing STV for their national legislative elections.
'Vote leakage' in STV occurs when votes for one party are transferred to candidates of another party.
Answer: True
Explanation: Vote leakage refers to the transfer of votes from candidates of one political party to candidates of another party, based on the voters' subsequent preferences expressed on the ballot.
A benefit of STV is that it prevents landslide victories where a single party wins all representation in a district.
Answer: True
Explanation: STV's proportional nature, achieved through multi-member districts and vote transfers, effectively prevents the phenomenon of single parties dominating representation in a district without broad electoral support.
Complexity and potential voter confusion are cited as criticisms of the STV system.
Answer: True
Explanation: The intricate counting process and the requirement for voters to rank multiple candidates are frequently cited as potential sources of complexity and confusion within the STV system.
STV can mitigate the 'spoiler effect' by transferring votes from eliminated candidates to their next choices.
Answer: True
Explanation: By allowing votes to be transferred based on subsequent preferences, STV reduces the 'spoiler effect,' where votes for less popular candidates might otherwise be wasted or inadvertently help elect a less preferred candidate.
STV helps ensure representation for minority factions within a district by allowing smaller parties to win seats with fewer votes.
Answer: True
Explanation: By enabling vote transfers and operating in multi-member districts, STV provides opportunities for minority factions to achieve representation, as the threshold for election can be met with a smaller proportion of the total vote.
STV formally satisfies the 'proportionality for solid coalitions' criterion.
Answer: True
Explanation: STV formally adheres to the 'proportionality for solid coalitions' criterion, meaning that a cohesive group of voters consistently ranking the same set of candidates will see their collective preference reflected proportionally in the seat allocation.
STV may reduce polarization because candidates can be elected through transfers from voters of other parties.
Answer: True
Explanation: By enabling candidates to gain support through vote transfers across party lines ('vote leakage'), STV can potentially reduce political polarization and encourage broader electoral appeal.
STV minimizes wasted votes by transferring ballots from surplus winners and eliminated candidates, unlike FPTP.
Answer: True
Explanation: STV's transfer mechanism ensures that votes for surplus winners and eliminated candidates continue to count towards electing other candidates, thereby minimizing the number of 'wasted' votes compared to FPTP systems.
STV ensures that most votes contribute to electing a candidate by transferring ballots from surplus winners and eliminated candidates.
Answer: True
Explanation: Through the systematic transfer of surplus and eliminated votes, STV aims to ensure that a high proportion of ballots effectively contribute to the election of a candidate, thereby maximizing voter utility.
The 'majority rule principle' is satisfied by STV because the collective group of elected winners is supported by a majority of the valid votes cast.
Answer: True
Explanation: STV is considered to satisfy the majority rule principle as the aggregate support for the elected candidates generally reflects the preferences of more than half of the voters in the district.
STV can potentially lower campaign costs as like-minded candidates might share expenses.
Answer: True
Explanation: Proponents suggest that STV may lead to reduced campaign costs, as candidates with similar platforms might collaborate on shared expenses or outreach efforts.
STV aims for fairness by ensuring successful candidates are elected with vastly different numbers of votes.
Answer: False
Explanation: STV aims for fairness by ensuring successful candidates are generally elected with similar levels of support, achieved through the quota system and vote transfers, rather than vastly different vote counts.
What does 'vote leakage' signify in the STV system?
Answer: The transfer of votes from one party's candidates to another party's candidates.
Explanation: Vote leakage in STV refers to the transfer of votes from candidates of one political party to candidates of another party, based on the voters' subsequent preferences expressed on the ballot.
Which of the following is cited as a benefit of the STV system?
Answer: It leads to more balanced and mixed representation within districts.
Explanation: A key benefit of STV is its capacity to foster more balanced and mixed representation within electoral districts, reflecting a wider spectrum of voter preferences.
What is a common criticism leveled against the STV system?
Answer: Its complexity can lead to voter confusion.
Explanation: A frequently cited criticism of STV is its inherent complexity, which can potentially lead to confusion among voters regarding the ranking and transfer processes.
What is the potential effect of STV on political partisanship and polarization?
Answer: It may reduce partisanship as candidates can gain support across party lines through vote transfers.
Explanation: STV may contribute to reduced political partisanship and polarization, as candidates can secure election through vote transfers from supporters of other parties, fostering broader appeal beyond strict party loyalty.
How does STV aim to reduce 'wasted votes' compared to FPTP?
Answer: By transferring surplus votes from winners and votes from eliminated candidates.
Explanation: STV minimizes wasted votes by transferring surplus votes from elected candidates and votes from eliminated candidates to subsequent preferences, ensuring that ballots continue to contribute to election outcomes.
How does STV ensure fairness in the number of votes required for election?
Answer: By using quotas, ensuring successful candidates have a substantial level of support.
Explanation: STV employs quotas to ensure fairness, requiring candidates to achieve a specific threshold of support to be elected, thereby promoting a more equitable distribution of representation.
District magnitude, the number of seats in a district, has little impact on the proportionality of STV results.
Answer: False
Explanation: District magnitude significantly influences proportionality in STV; larger districts (more seats) generally yield more proportional outcomes, facilitating representation for smaller parties and minority viewpoints.
Filling casual vacancies in STV systems is straightforward and universally handled by re-examining previous ballots.
Answer: False
Explanation: The methods for filling casual vacancies in STV systems can vary and are not universally straightforward; common approaches include countbacks, appointment, or holding new by-elections.
The 'countback' method for filling vacancies involves re-examining previous ballots to find the next-ranked candidate.
Answer: True
Explanation: The countback method is a procedure used in some electoral systems, including STV, where ballots from a previous election are re-examined to determine the next-preferred candidate to fill a vacancy.
Arguments against larger district magnitudes in STV include concerns about increased campaign costs and voter disconnect.
Answer: True
Explanation: Critics of larger district magnitudes in STV elections raise concerns regarding potentially higher campaign expenditures required to reach a broader electorate and the possibility of a diminished connection between representatives and constituents.
The 'clone paradox' suggests that STV outcomes can be significantly altered by adding or removing identical candidates.
Answer: False
Explanation: The 'clone paradox' refers to voting systems where outcomes are sensitive to the addition or removal of identical candidates. STV is generally considered resistant to this paradox, aiming for stability in such scenarios.
STV's ranked-choice mechanism can potentially mitigate the 'center squeeze' phenomenon.
Answer: True
Explanation: The 'center squeeze,' where centrist candidates are disadvantaged by vote splitting, can potentially be mitigated by STV's ranked-choice system, allowing voters to express preferences beyond their initial choice.
Tactical voting is considered easier to execute effectively in STV than in FPTP systems.
Answer: False
Explanation: Tactical voting is generally considered more difficult to execute effectively in STV compared to FPTP due to the complexity of the vote transfer process and the need for voters to accurately rank preferences.
Independent candidates in STV elections rely solely on their first-preference votes to win.
Answer: False
Explanation: Independent candidates, like party candidates, can win by accumulating enough first-preference votes to meet the quota or by receiving sufficient vote transfers from other candidates.
STV's use of multi-member districts inherently reduces the impact of gerrymandering compared to FPTP.
Answer: True
Explanation: By utilizing multi-member districts and focusing on proportional representation, STV inherently diminishes the effectiveness of gerrymandering, which is typically employed to manipulate single-member district boundaries.
'Terminal transfers' are analyzed in STV to understand how votes are distributed when a candidate's remaining votes cannot be transferred to candidates of their own party.
Answer: True
Explanation: Terminal transfers are examined in STV analysis to trace the distribution of votes when a candidate's remaining ballots cannot be transferred to other candidates within their own party, offering insights into voter behavior.
How does district magnitude affect the proportionality of STV results?
Answer: Larger districts generally result in more proportional outcomes.
Explanation: District magnitude, defined as the number of seats to be filled in a district, directly influences proportionality in STV; larger districts tend to yield more proportional outcomes by providing greater opportunities for smaller parties and minority viewpoints to gain representation.
How are casual vacancies typically handled in STV systems?
Answer: Methods vary, including countbacks, appointment, or holding a new by-election.
Explanation: The procedures for filling casual vacancies in STV systems are not uniform and can include methods such as countbacks, appointment by relevant authorities, or conducting new by-elections.
What is the potential impact of larger district magnitudes in STV elections?
Answer: Greater proportionality and better representation for minority viewpoints.
Explanation: Larger district magnitudes in STV elections generally lead to greater proportionality and enhance the representation of minority viewpoints, as the threshold for election is lowered relative to the total vote.
What is the 'center squeeze' phenomenon, and how might STV address it?
Answer: It's when centrist candidates split the vote, allowing extremists to win; STV can mitigate this via ranked choices.
Explanation: The 'center squeeze' occurs when moderate candidates divide the vote, inadvertently benefiting more extreme candidates. STV's ranked-choice mechanism can potentially mitigate this by allowing voters to express preferences beyond their initial choice, favoring more broadly acceptable candidates.
What is the role of independent candidates in STV elections?
Answer: Their success depends on garnering enough first-preference votes or receiving sufficient transfers.
Explanation: Independent candidates can participate and be elected under STV, with their success contingent upon securing sufficient first-preference votes to meet the quota or receiving adequate vote transfers.
How does STV's approach to representation differ from 'gerrymandering' in FPTP systems?
Answer: STV's multi-member districts and proportional representation inherently reduce the impact of gerrymandering.
Explanation: STV's design, utilizing multi-member districts and aiming for proportional representation, inherently mitigates the effects of gerrymandering, which is typically associated with the manipulation of single-member district boundaries in FPTP systems.