AHC: The most complex electoral system possible?

[ArKhan]

Your challenge is to create the most complex, convoluted, and downright insane electoral system you can think of, and explain an at least semi-plausible way it could come into effect in a particular country.

Inspiration

Useful guide

 

[Asami]

I will be completely serious when I say The Electoral College of the USA.

 

[ArKhan]

I will be completely serious when I say The Electoral College of the USA.

It could stand to be much worse. Consider my "electoral college from hell" as discussed in the ASB electoral systems thread:

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the electoral college from hell!

This will combine ColeMercury's "none of the above" rule:

I've got a new one: what if, in American presidential elections, a failure to vote by registered voters counts as a vote for "None of the above"? And therefore, if a plurality of registered voters in a state do not vote, that state's electoral votes are therefore awarded to nobody?

Thande's "Every state gets an equal vote" rule:

Here's another one. US elections if the small states and confederalists really got their way at the constitutional convention, and each state has an equal electoral vote regardless of size. The electoral vote for each candidate is therefore simply the number of states carried. If the state's electoral vote was split OTL, the largest electoral vote share takes the state's single electoral vote in OTL. If this results in a hung electoral college, the winner is determined by the party balance in Congress according to the constitution. Obviously this is ASB because I'm using the same election results as OTL and in TTL there would be an incentive to split up new states smaller to get more votes

and the Red's "jungle primary" rule.

What if American Presidential elections followed the system of the 'Jungle Primary'? Where candidates of all parties were listed on the same ballot and the two candidates with the highest popular vote went into a run-off?

Just for the sake of insanity, I'm going to have "none of the above" be able to take part in the run-off election, just because it creates the opportunity for a candidate to run effectively unopposed, and for "none of the above" to actually win, in which case the election will be thrown to house. Oh, and the house can't elect anyone who actually took part in the primaries if "none of the above" wins.

 

[zeppelinair]

well, weighted voting rights inversely proportional to the number of horses possessed per capita seems to be one.
that, with open ballot, seems the perfect chaos of an election.
and it would be used in Mongolia.

 

[Asami]

well, weighted voting rights inversely proportional to the number of horses possessed per capita seems to be one.
that, with open ballot, seems the perfect chaos of an election.
and it would be used in Mongolia.

Didn't they do that once back in the Genghis Khan days?

 

[ArKhan]

well, weighted voting rights inversely proportional to the number of horses possessed per capita seems to be one.
that, with open ballot, seems the perfect chaos of an election.
and it would be used in Mongolia.

Didn't they do that once back in the Genghis Khan days?

Now that is a hilarious image.

 

[Sian]

It could stand to be much worse. Consider my "electoral college from hell" as discussed in the ASB electoral systems thread:

Maybe, but the American Electoral Collage is pretty close to being the most complex and insane electoral system ever actually used (only other i know of that i think insaner would be a Roman Electoral system with a few tweaks)

 

[Sulemain]

Maybe, but the American Electoral Collage is pretty close to being the most complex and insane electoral system ever actually used (only other i know of that i think insaner would be a Roman Electoral system with a few tweaks)

I think the Romans thought about the One Man, One Vote system and thought "nah, we can do better then that". Of course, they did end up with a Pratchett-esque variant of it.

 

[ProfJets]

The election of the Doge of Venice was very complex. 9 members of the Grand Council, chosen by lot, elected 41 people to be part of the next round. The 41 were then reduced, again by lot, to 12, who chose 25 for the next round, who were then reduced by lot, etc., etc., for four more rounds, until you finally got to the group who would actually elect the Doge. That system came about from a desire to reduce the influence of any one or group of great families on the process. I could imagine situations where to really prevent any one or group of great families from choosing the Doge, the Venetians decide to have the Doge himself elected by lot from among the last field of candidates. There is some precedent for that from the Greeks, and to a lesser extent the Romans (who chose duties, but not elected officials per se, by lot).

 

[rottengreekfire]

The election of the Doge of Venice was very complex.

This fillerfilller

 

[Hoist40]

Don't think the US system is particularly complex.

Parliamentary systems are more complex since once the votes are counted they can have days or weeks or months of negotiating to decide who is Prime Minister. And negotiating especially behind closed doors can be very complex.

The US system is just a way for small population States to balance out large population states in a Federal system.

 

[Alex Richards]

The election of the Doge of Venice was very complex. 9 members of the Grand Council, chosen by lot, elected 41 people to be part of the next round. The 41 were then reduced, again by lot, to 12, who chose 25 for the next round, who were then reduced by lot, etc., etc., for four more rounds, until you finally got to the group who would actually elect the Doge. That system came about from a desire to reduce the influence of any one or group of great families on the process. I could imagine situations where to really prevent any one or group of great families from choosing the Doge, the Venetians decide to have the Doge himself elected by lot from among the last field of candidates. There is some precedent for that from the Greeks, and to a lesser extent the Romans (who chose duties, but not elected officials per se, by lot).

Didn't that system have a beggar boy being pulled off the streets to perform the lot drawing or something like that?

 

[pternagy]

I will be completely serious when I say The Electoral College of the USA.

Nah. That's actually pretty simple. Each state gets a block of votes. Whoever wins the most votes in the state controls that state's block of votes. Whoever gets the majority of the votes win.

It just isn't very fair.

For real life elections venturing into the overly complex, try the City of London...

I've got an idea or two on overly complex elections....

The Councillor System of Government--Or, Democratic Soviets. Councils of Workers and Soldiers govern each town and city. Whatever they say go. Delegates from each council in a region meet to discuss regional issues. Whatever they say goes. Councils of Regional Delegates meet as the National Council. Whatever they say goes.

If their is a dispute, everyone votes on which idea is better.

Coprotocracy--Or, Corporations for All!. During the 30s, some European country decides to incorporate everything rather than devolving into fascism. All citizens are given one share of National Stock, which can be bought and sold. The government is a board of directors whose voting power is based on the number of shares they own and the number of shares whose owners have delegated their votes to them. Local governments are subsidiary corporations. Government ministries are corporations contracted to provide services.

The Estates of the Realm--Or, an Unreformed Parliament Gone Mad! The 1707 Act of Union results in the rules of the Scottish Parliament being adopted, with some modifications. Over the years, instead of proper reform, additional people get additional rights to vote. By 2013, Parliament consists of:

• All hereditary nobles with the rank of Baron/Lord of Parliament and higher
• Any of their heirs who have been invited by Writs of Summons. Those Writs are commonly given out to prevent a lord from buying a safe seat for his son. "If you can't beat them, let them join us anyway."
• 2 Shire Commissioners from every county and unitary authority in Great Britain. Shire Commissioners are elected by 40 Shilling Freeholders. By 2013, tracts of land in every corner of the nation are divided into plots worth 40 shillings to allow anyone who wants to buy the franchise. (By the way, what is the symbol for shilling?)
• 1 Burgh Commissioner from every Royal Burgh. To ensure democratic representation, almost every single settled place is granted the style of royal burgh, and many cities are divided into dozens of burghs. Each burgh can set its own standards for who can vote. Very small and depopulated burghs may have two voters. Others may allow anyone on the council to vote and others may allow almost everyone to vote. Some Burghs have only a corporation, as in a publicly traded company, as the only "person" on the electoral roll. "Corporate Burghs" elect MPs to speak for their corporate boroughs. Burghs that technically have no voters have representatives appointed by the Government of the Day.
• The University Seats. Graduates from every university get to vote for an MP to represent their alma mater.
• Anglican Bishops in England, Wales, and Ireland, Catholic Bishops and Abbots throughout the U.K., Presbyterian Presbyters, and representatives of other major religions have seats.
• Technocrats, judges, royal mistresses, and royal bastards customarily receive life peerages.

People entitled to vote in multiple places, except peers, can vote in all of them. Oh...and all MPs sit in the same house.

 

[ProfJets]

Didn't that system have a beggar boy being pulled off the streets to perform the lot drawing or something like that?

I've never heard that one, but I suppose it's possible; they might want to just take someone in off the streets, to minimize the possibility of rigging the lots.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Coprocracy is presumably a typo or Freudian slip, given the meaning of 'copros'. Just sayin....

 

[pternagy]

Coprocracy is presumably a typo or Freudian slip, given the meaning of 'copros'. Just sayin....

It was a typo. But seeing what I actually wrote, I should just edit my post to describe the current U.S. system and malady and claim that the name was deliberate.

Actually, that and an earlier post mentioning the Roman election system get me thinking....


Coprocracy--Or, the Checked Rule of the Great Unwashed. As part of a bizarre compromise between those who wanted democracy and those who didn't, the Founding Fathers decided to make the American system a series of indirect elections. The people at the bottom seem to have power over the people at the top, but as things always flow downhill the power is heavily limited.

• Every citizen can vote for his state's delegation to the House of Representatives. Each state elects a delegation as a block with the number of delegates proportional to the state's population.
• The House of Representatives elects the Senate. State delegations are grouped into four Senatorial Districts. Each Senatorial District, by block voting elects a number of Senators, again based on the size of the population of the Senatorial District.
• The Senate elects the Congress, which consists of one delegate from each state and exercises executive authority. It also appoints the Courts and no law can be passed unless Congress proposes it.
• After each House election, when elections for the next two levels take place, the retiring body can reject the candidates presented to it. So the outgoing Congress can veto any candidates sent over by the Senate and the outgoing Senate can veto anyone sent up from the House. If a body vetoes its replacements twice, the nominating body (the Senate for Congress and the House for the Senate) is dissolved and fresh elections are held.

 

[Isot the Terrible]

What about the Irish senate election, 1925?

The election was by single transferable vote, with the entire nation forming a single 19-seat electoral district. There were 76 candidates on the ballot paper, whom voters ranked by preference.

There were three methods of being included on the ballot. Outgoing Senators could nominate themselves for re-election, the Seanad as a whole could nominate an equal number of candidates to the vacancies (only 1/4 of the Seanad were elected at any one time), and the Dáil (Irish House of Commons) could nominate twice the number of vacancies.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Seanad_election,_1925#cite_note-const33-5

The largest party, Cumann na nGaedheal, did not at a national level formally endorse candidates, even those its TDs had nominated,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Seanad_election,_1925#cite_note-21 presenting the election as nonpartisan. The 2nd largest party, Sinn Féin, called for a boycott of the election. Turnout was 23%.

 

[ArKhan]

The Estates of the Realm--Or, an Unreformed Parliament Gone Mad! The 1707 Act of Union results in the rules of the Scottish Parliament being adopted, with some modifications. Over the years, instead of proper reform, additional people get additional rights to vote. By 2013, Parliament consists of:

• All hereditary nobles with the rank of Baron/Lord of Parliament and higher
• Any of their heirs who have been invited by Writs of Summons. Those Writs are commonly given out to prevent a lord from buying a safe seat for his son. "If you can't beat them, let them join us anyway."
• 2 Shire Commissioners from every county and unitary authority in Great Britain. Shire Commissioners are elected by 40 Shilling Freeholders. By 2013, tracts of land in every corner of the nation are divided into plots worth 40 shillings to allow anyone who wants to buy the franchise. (By the way, what is the symbol for shilling?)
• 1 Burgh Commissioner from every Royal Burgh. To ensure democratic representation, almost every single settled place is granted the style of royal burgh, and many cities are divided into dozens of burghs. Each burgh can set its own standards for who can vote. Very small and depopulated burghs may have two voters. Others may allow anyone on the council to vote and others may allow almost everyone to vote. Some Burghs have only a corporation, as in a publicly traded company, as the only "person" on the electoral roll. "Corporate Burghs" elect MPs to speak for their corporate boroughs. Burghs that technically have no voters have representatives appointed by the Government of the Day.
• The University Seats. Graduates from every university get to vote for an MP to represent their alma mater.
• Anglican Bishops in England, Wales, and Ireland, Catholic Bishops and Abbots throughout the U.K., Presbyterian Presbyters, and representatives of other major religions have seats.
• Technocrats, judges, royal mistresses, and royal bastards customarily receive life peerages.

People entitled to vote in multiple places, except peers, can vote in all of them. Oh...and all MPs sit in the same house.

I love it!

 

[Sulemain]

Nah. That's actually pretty simple. Each state gets a block of votes. Whoever wins the most votes in the state controls that state's block of votes. Whoever gets the majority of the votes win.

It just isn't very fair.

For real life elections venturing into the overly complex, try the City of London...

I've got an idea or two on overly complex elections....

The Councillor System of Government--Or, Democratic Soviets. Councils of Workers and Soldiers govern each town and city. Whatever they say go. Delegates from each council in a region meet to discuss regional issues. Whatever they say goes. Councils of Regional Delegates meet as the National Council. Whatever they say goes.

If their is a dispute, everyone votes on which idea is better.

Coprotocracy--Or, Corporations for All!. During the 30s, some European country decides to incorporate everything rather than devolving into fascism. All citizens are given one share of National Stock, which can be bought and sold. The government is a board of directors whose voting power is based on the number of shares they own and the number of shares whose owners have delegated their votes to them. Local governments are subsidiary corporations. Government ministries are corporations contracted to provide services.

The Estates of the Realm--Or, an Unreformed Parliament Gone Mad! The 1707 Act of Union results in the rules of the Scottish Parliament being adopted, with some modifications. Over the years, instead of proper reform, additional people get additional rights to vote. By 2013, Parliament consists of:

• All hereditary nobles with the rank of Baron/Lord of Parliament and higher
• Any of their heirs who have been invited by Writs of Summons. Those Writs are commonly given out to prevent a lord from buying a safe seat for his son. "If you can't beat them, let them join us anyway."
• 2 Shire Commissioners from every county and unitary authority in Great Britain. Shire Commissioners are elected by 40 Shilling Freeholders. By 2013, tracts of land in every corner of the nation are divided into plots worth 40 shillings to allow anyone who wants to buy the franchise. (By the way, what is the symbol for shilling?)
• 1 Burgh Commissioner from every Royal Burgh. To ensure democratic representation, almost every single settled place is granted the style of royal burgh, and many cities are divided into dozens of burghs. Each burgh can set its own standards for who can vote. Very small and depopulated burghs may have two voters. Others may allow anyone on the council to vote and others may allow almost everyone to vote. Some Burghs have only a corporation, as in a publicly traded company, as the only "person" on the electoral roll. "Corporate Burghs" elect MPs to speak for their corporate boroughs. Burghs that technically have no voters have representatives appointed by the Government of the Day.
• The University Seats. Graduates from every university get to vote for an MP to represent their alma mater.
• Anglican Bishops in England, Wales, and Ireland, Catholic Bishops and Abbots throughout the U.K., Presbyterian Presbyters, and representatives of other major religions have seats.
• Technocrats, judges, royal mistresses, and royal bastards customarily receive life peerages.

People entitled to vote in multiple places, except peers, can vote in all of them. Oh...and all MPs sit in the same house.

That sounds even more British then our current system, which is really saying something.

 

[ArKhan]

I have one, but I'm not entirely sure where or how it would it could come into play:

• The nation is a semi-presidential federal republic with a bicameral parliament and an electoral college for presidential elections.
• Multi-member constituencies are the norm, with the number of candidates elected by a certain ridding being determined by it's population. These are elected by a preferential voting system, where voters "rank" candidates, so for example if you're ridding has seven members, you would rank your top 7 candidates by assigning your favorite candidate "1" worth 7 votes, and your least favorite "7" worth 1 vote. This however, only makes up half of the lower house
• The second half of the lower house is determined by party list proportional voting.
• The upper house is determined by provincial governors appointing half of their province's senators from the provincial legislature, and the premier appointing the other half, with each province appointing a number of senators roughly in proportion to it's population. To prevent party favoritism, their appointments must include members of all parties present with in their provincial legislature.
• Provincial elections are unicameral, and elected from the same "half preferential, half party list proportional" method as the federal lower house. Provincial power is divided between the Governor, who is elected by preferential voting, and the Premier who is elected by the provincial house.
• Presidential primary elections follow more or less the "jungle primary" rule seen in Louisiana, where all candidates from all parties appear on a single ballot. Preferential voting similar to the lower house elections are use, and the results are sent to the electoral college, which like the US system is based on provincial population, but instead of the FPTP "winner takes the state" system, something similar to the D'Hondt method is used.
• The top two scoring candidates in the electoral college are then selected for a second round runoff vote. For this reason every major political party usually nominates two candidates for the primaries so there is chance that both candidates will be from their party. The "second place" candidate from each party is usually selected as their party's candidate for prime minister, since only members of the legislature can run. In the second round, a single non-transferable vote method is used, and the results of each state are again sent to the electoral college.
• The Prime minister is elected not from one house, but from a special assembly of both. There are five major political parties so minorities and coalitions are the norm. Because the President and Prime minister are elected from separate methods, cohabitation is possible, and common. The Prime minister appoints half the cabinet, and the president appoints the other half. Each presents the Parliament with a short list of candidates for each office, and the parliament then votes to determine who on the list gets the job. The Prime minister is also the first in the line of succession should the president die, resign, or otherwise be unable to perform his or her duties.
• Parliament is able to pass no confidence measures against either the President, Prime Minister, or any cabinet minister. However, if this does happen, parliament must dissolve and hold a special general election.
• A single term limit prevents the President or Prime minister for standing for re-election. A general election must be held once every 10 years, or sooner if a non-confidence motion passes.
• Cumulative Mandates are in effect. This means that in addition to being President or Prime Minister, the leaders still hold onto their seats in the legislature. Members of the federal upper house, Provincial governors, and premiers also still hold onto their provincial legislature seats.