approval voting bill in 2016 New Hampshire!
39 views
Skip to first unread message
Warren D Smith
Jan 21, 2016, 8:38:39 PM1/21/16
to electionscience, Steven Brams
http://ivn.us/2016/01/20/n-h-lawmakers-say-approval-voting-give-voters-greater-representation/
Here is my attempt to copy & paste the news story:
Jan 20, 2016 By Shawn M. Griffiths Shawn M. Griffiths
Tagged in: New Hampshire Elections Approval Voting Ranked Choice Voting
Not Red, Not Blue
The Concord Monitor’s political blog, the Political Monitor, reported
Wednesday that two bills have been introduced in the New Hampshire
House of Representatives that would adopt approval voting for
municipal and statewide elections. Both bills received initial
hearings Tuesday
House Bills 1265 and 1521, sponsored by state Reps. Eric Schleien,
Keith Ammon, Frank Edelblut, would allow voters in municipal and
statewide elections, respectively, to choose as many candidates as
they want on a ballot with multiple candidates. The voting method is
commonly referred to as approval voting.
How Does Approval Voting Work?
[linked to http://ivn.us/2013/10/18/approval-voting-work/ ]
"You have a lot more information about what the voter thinks about
each individual candidate with this method than with the current
method," said Rep. Dan McGuire during Tuesday's hearing.
The Political Monitor reports:
"Approval voting is one type of alternative voting system, among more
complicated variants like the Condorcet Method or instant-runoff
voting. A number of efforts to allow such systems in New Hampshire
have been filed by legislators in recent years, but haven't received
much traction.
Advocates of alternative voting systems argue that our current system,
called plurality voting, does a poor job of reflecting voters'
opinions, makes it hard for alternative viewpoints to be heard, and
leads to divisive politics.
Some proponents used the current GOP presidential primary field to
make the case for approval voting.
Under the current system, GOP primary voters can only select one
candidate, which doesn't show whether or not they would be willing to
support other candidates in the large field. Under approval voting,
voters would be given the option to select all the candidates they
think are presidential material.
"A half-dozen proponents argued that this would allow voters to truly
reflect their opinion, removing the need for strategic voting, or
'gaming the system,' in which a primary voter selects a candidate only
because they think that candidate has the best chance of winning in
the general election," the Political Monitor reports.
Supporters of approval voting argue that not only does this not
adequately reflect voter opinion, but it can end up swaying an
election for a candidate who does not have the most support.
Opponents and skeptics, however, question the fairness of this voting
method. New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan
expressed concern that "allowing a different number of votes would
allow those who voted for more candidates to effectively 'dilute' the
vote of people who vote for fewer candidates," according to the
Political Monitor.
In terms of how approval voting might affect the cost or
administration of elections, there would be very little changes. The
alternative voting method would not require a change in ballot design
or the function of ballot counting machines, an excuse used to block
the adoption of ranked choice voting in several municipalities across
the U.S, despite the will of voters.
--
Warren D. Smith
http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking
"endorse" as 1st step)
Here is my attempt to copy & paste the news story:
Jan 20, 2016 By Shawn M. Griffiths Shawn M. Griffiths
Tagged in: New Hampshire Elections Approval Voting Ranked Choice Voting
Not Red, Not Blue
The Concord Monitor’s political blog, the Political Monitor, reported
Wednesday that two bills have been introduced in the New Hampshire
House of Representatives that would adopt approval voting for
municipal and statewide elections. Both bills received initial
hearings Tuesday
House Bills 1265 and 1521, sponsored by state Reps. Eric Schleien,
Keith Ammon, Frank Edelblut, would allow voters in municipal and
statewide elections, respectively, to choose as many candidates as
they want on a ballot with multiple candidates. The voting method is
commonly referred to as approval voting.
How Does Approval Voting Work?
[linked to http://ivn.us/2013/10/18/approval-voting-work/ ]
"You have a lot more information about what the voter thinks about
each individual candidate with this method than with the current
method," said Rep. Dan McGuire during Tuesday's hearing.
The Political Monitor reports:
"Approval voting is one type of alternative voting system, among more
complicated variants like the Condorcet Method or instant-runoff
voting. A number of efforts to allow such systems in New Hampshire
have been filed by legislators in recent years, but haven't received
much traction.
Advocates of alternative voting systems argue that our current system,
called plurality voting, does a poor job of reflecting voters'
opinions, makes it hard for alternative viewpoints to be heard, and
leads to divisive politics.
Some proponents used the current GOP presidential primary field to
make the case for approval voting.
Under the current system, GOP primary voters can only select one
candidate, which doesn't show whether or not they would be willing to
support other candidates in the large field. Under approval voting,
voters would be given the option to select all the candidates they
think are presidential material.
"A half-dozen proponents argued that this would allow voters to truly
reflect their opinion, removing the need for strategic voting, or
'gaming the system,' in which a primary voter selects a candidate only
because they think that candidate has the best chance of winning in
the general election," the Political Monitor reports.
Supporters of approval voting argue that not only does this not
adequately reflect voter opinion, but it can end up swaying an
election for a candidate who does not have the most support.
Opponents and skeptics, however, question the fairness of this voting
method. New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan
expressed concern that "allowing a different number of votes would
allow those who voted for more candidates to effectively 'dilute' the
vote of people who vote for fewer candidates," according to the
Political Monitor.
In terms of how approval voting might affect the cost or
administration of elections, there would be very little changes. The
alternative voting method would not require a change in ballot design
or the function of ballot counting machines, an excuse used to block
the adoption of ranked choice voting in several municipalities across
the U.S, despite the will of voters.
--
Warren D. Smith
http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking
"endorse" as 1st step)
Steve Cobb
Jan 22, 2016, 12:08:55 PM1/22/16
to The Center for Election Science, sj...@nyu.edu
The science writer for New Hampshire's Concord Monitor is taking advantage of the juxtaposition of the NH AV effort and the ME IRV effort:
It would be nice to see them pass in both states....
Clay Shentrup
Jan 23, 2016, 1:33:58 AM1/23/16
to The Center for Election Science
Welcome to the party.
Warren D Smith
Feb 5, 2016, 4:50:16 PM2/5/16
to electionscience, Steven Brams
As of Friday 5 Feb 2016,
plurality-style polls of New Hampshire "likely voters"
aggregated by HuffPost
find in the GOP nomination contest
Trump 32%
Rubio 16%
Cruz 13%
Kasich 11%
J.Bush 9%
Christie 5%
Carson 3%
Fiorina 3%
And in the Democratic contest
Sanders 57%
H.Clinton 38
But using APPROVAL style polling, a WBUR poll by
MassInc Polling Group 2-4 Feb 2016
http://RangeVoting.org/final-wbur-poll-new-hampshire
http://RangeVoting.org/NewHampFavUnfav2to4Feb2016.png
found (for each candidate we report the percent of
voters who rated him/her "favorable" minus the percent who rated "unfavorable";
only voters in candidate's own party are asked; telephone;
410 likely Republican primary voters and 393 likely Democratic primary voters):
CANDDT Favorable-Unfavorable
Sanders +70%
H.Clinton +43%
Rubio +16%
Christie +6%
Trump +5%
Kasich -3%
J.Bush -3%
Cruz -7%
which notice is QUITE DIFFERENT than the plurality style polling
would lead you to believe.
A score-style New Hampshire poll by HARPER 1-2 Feb 2016
(425 likely Republican primary voters in NH, land line interviews conducted
using Interactive Voice Response IVR) found:
http://harperpolling.com/docs/default-source/default-document-library/16-02-nh-gop-primary-toplines.pdf?sfvrsn=0
CANDDT VeryFav SomewhatFav SomehatUnFav VeryUnFav Unsure
Trump 37 14 13
32 2
J.Bush 15 30 25
25 5%
Kasich 18 27 23
27 4
Rubio 15 27 25
28 5
Carson 12 28 26
29 5
Christie 10 30 27
29 4
Fiorina 14 26 24
32 5
TedCruz 15 21 23
38 3
RandPaul 9 20 29
33 8
Huckabee 7 17 26
38 12
Santorum 5 13 26
43 13
Gilmour 3 6 22
44 26
plurality-style polls of New Hampshire "likely voters"
aggregated by HuffPost
find in the GOP nomination contest
Trump 32%
Rubio 16%
Cruz 13%
Kasich 11%
J.Bush 9%
Christie 5%
Carson 3%
Fiorina 3%
And in the Democratic contest
Sanders 57%
H.Clinton 38
But using APPROVAL style polling, a WBUR poll by
MassInc Polling Group 2-4 Feb 2016
http://RangeVoting.org/final-wbur-poll-new-hampshire
http://RangeVoting.org/NewHampFavUnfav2to4Feb2016.png
found (for each candidate we report the percent of
voters who rated him/her "favorable" minus the percent who rated "unfavorable";
only voters in candidate's own party are asked; telephone;
410 likely Republican primary voters and 393 likely Democratic primary voters):
CANDDT Favorable-Unfavorable
Sanders +70%
H.Clinton +43%
Rubio +16%
Christie +6%
Trump +5%
Kasich -3%
J.Bush -3%
Cruz -7%
which notice is QUITE DIFFERENT than the plurality style polling
would lead you to believe.
A score-style New Hampshire poll by HARPER 1-2 Feb 2016
(425 likely Republican primary voters in NH, land line interviews conducted
using Interactive Voice Response IVR) found:
http://harperpolling.com/docs/default-source/default-document-library/16-02-nh-gop-primary-toplines.pdf?sfvrsn=0
CANDDT VeryFav SomewhatFav SomehatUnFav VeryUnFav Unsure
Trump 37 14 13
32 2
J.Bush 15 30 25
25 5%
Kasich 18 27 23
27 4
Rubio 15 27 25
28 5
Carson 12 28 26
29 5
Christie 10 30 27
29 4
Fiorina 14 26 24
32 5
TedCruz 15 21 23
38 3
RandPaul 9 20 29
33 8
Huckabee 7 17 26
38 12
Santorum 5 13 26
43 13
Gilmour 3 6 22
44 26
Warren D Smith
Feb 5, 2016, 6:10:20 PM2/5/16
to electionscience, Steven Brams
On 2/5/16, Warren D Smith <warre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As of Friday 5 Feb 2016,
> plurality-style polls of New Hampshire "likely voters"
> aggregated by HuffPost
> find in the GOP nomination contest
>
> Trump 32%
> Rubio 16%
> Cruz 13%
> Kasich 11%
> J.Bush 9%
> Christie 5%
> Carson 3%
> Fiorina 3%
Meanwhile Real Clear Politics (a different poll aggregator) finds
> As of Friday 5 Feb 2016,
> plurality-style polls of New Hampshire "likely voters"
> aggregated by HuffPost
> find in the GOP nomination contest
>
> Trump 32%
> Rubio 16%
> Cruz 13%
> Kasich 11%
> J.Bush 9%
> Christie 5%
> Carson 3%
> Fiorina 3%
Trump 31
Rubio 15
Cruz 12
Kasich 11
J.Bush 10
Christie 5
Fiorina 4
Carson 3
> And in the Democratic contest
>
> Sanders 57%
> H.Clinton 38
Sanders 55
Clinton 38
(rest are unsure / don't know)
Meanwhile I found this additional approval-style
poll by Franklin Pierce University / Boston Herald
(26-30 January 2016, survey based on
responses from 409 randomly selected likely Democratic presidential
primary voters
in New Hampshire, Interviews by landline and cellular telephone)
http://www.bostonherald.com/sites/default/files/media/2016/01/31/FPU-BH-Jan26-30-Dem.pdf
also copied to here:
http://RangeVoting.org/FPU-BH-Jan26-30-Dem.pdf
CANDDT Favorable UnFavorable
H.Clinton 72 25%
B.Sanders 86 9
M.O'Malley 39 24
(rest don't know / unsure)
...and concerning Michael Bloomberg,
possible independent presidential candidate:
6 VeryFavorable
24 SomewhatFav
14 SomewhatUnFav
5 VeryUnFav
51 Unsure/Don't know
Warren D Smith
Feb 5, 2016, 6:22:12 PM2/5/16
to electionscience, Steven Brams
Meanwhile I found this additional approval-style
poll by Franklin Pierce University / Boston Herald
(26-30 January 2016, survey based on
responses from 439 randomly selected likely Republican presidential
poll by Franklin Pierce University / Boston Herald
(26-30 January 2016, survey based on
primary voters in New Hampshire, Interviews by landline and cellular telephone)
http://www.bostonherald.com/sites/default/files/media/2016/01/31/FPU-BH-Jan26-30-Rep.pdf
also copied to here:
http://RangeVoting.org/FPU-BH-Jan26-30-Rep.pdf
CANDDT Favorable UnFavorable Plurality
Carson 59 31 3
Fiorina 57 28 5
Rubio 59 32 10
Cruz 57 39 13
Trump 56 39 38
Kasich 46 36 8
Christie 47 43 5
Santorum 45 27 0
Huckabee 43 38 1
RandPaul 44 42 5
J.Bush 48 47 10
rather differently from the plurality style polls, indeed from
the same-sample, same-pollster plur poll in third column.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages