Electoral System in the Philippines

The Philippines has universal direct suffrage at age 18 and older to elect the president, vice
president (who runs independently), and most of the seats in the bicameral legislature, consisting of
the House of Representatives and the Senate; a minority of House members known as sectoral
representatives are appointed by the president. Elections are held not just for national leadership but
also for representation at the provincial and local levels. In the last elections in May 2004, some 74
percent of eligible voters participated, but the process was marred by violence and numerous
irregularities, which the political opposition continues to protest, even calling for the presidents
impeachment. [Source: Library of Congress *]

Elections in the Philippines are the arena in which the country's elite families compete for political
power. The wealthiest clans contest national and provincial offices. Families of lesser wealth
compete for municipal offices. In the barangays, where most people are equally poor, election
confers social prestige but no real power or money. *

The constitution also empowers the commission to "accredit citizens' arms of the Commission on
Elections." This refers to the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL), a private group
established in the 1950s, with advice and assistance from the United States, to keep elections
honest. NAMFREL recruited public-spirited citizens (320,000 volunteers in 104,000 precincts in the
1987 congressional elections) to watch the voting and monitor ballot-counting, and it prepared a
"quick count," based mostly on urban returns, to publicize the results immediately. Because the
Commission on Elections can take weeks or even months to certify official returns, the National
Movement for Free Elections makes it harder for unscrupulous politicians to distort the results.
NAMFREL itself has sometimes been denounced by election losers as being a tool of United States
intervention and has not always been impartial. In 1986 it favored Aquino, and its chairman, Jose
Concepcion, was subsequently named Aquino's minister of trade and industry. *

The 1987 constitution establishes a new system of elections. The terms of representatives are
reduced from four years to three, and the presidential term is lengthened from four years to six.
Senators also serve a six-year term. The Constitution's transitory provisions are scheduled to expire
in 1992, after which there is to be a three-year election cycle. Suffrage is universal at age eighteen.
The constitution established a Commission on Elections that is empowered to supervise every
aspect of campaigns and elections. It is composed of a chairperson and six commissioners, who
cannot have been candidates for any position in the immediately preceding elections. A majority of
the commissioners must be lawyers, and all must be college-educated. They are appointed by the
president with the consent of the Commission on Appointments and serve a single seven-year term.
The Commission on Elections enforces and administers all election laws and regulations and has
original jurisdiction over all legal disputes arising from disputed results. To counter the unwholesome
influence occasionally exercised by soldiers and other armed groups, the commission may depute
law enforcement agencies, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines. In dire situations, the
commission can take entire municipalities and provinces under its control, or order new elections. *
 The final decision on all legislative elections rests with the electoral tribunals of the Senate and
House of Representatives. Each electoral tribunal is composed of nine members, three of whom are
members of the Supreme Court designated by the chief justice. The remaining six are members of
the Senate or the House, chosen on the basis of proportional representation from parties in the
chamber. *

A countrys electoral system is the method used to calculate the

number of elected positions in government that individuals
and parties are awarded after elections. In other words, it is the
way that votes are translated into seats in parliament or in other
areas of government (such as the presidency). There are many
different types of electoral systems in use around the world, and
even within individual countries, different electoral systems may be
found in different regions and at different levels of government (e.g.,
for elections to school boards, city councils, state legislatures,
governorships, etc.).

Electoral systems can be divided into three general types:

1. Plurality electoral systems

Also called first-past-the-post or winner-take-all systems,
plurality systems simply award a seat to the individual candidate
who receives the most votes in an election. The candidate need not
get a majority (50%+) of the vote to win; so long as he has a larger
number of votes than all other candidates, he is declared the winner.
Plurality systems normally depend on single-member constituencies,
and allow voters to indicate only one vote on their ballot (by pulling
a single lever, punching a hole in the ballot, making an X, etc.)
Plurality electoral systems also tend to encourage the growth of
relatively stable political systems dominated by two major parties (a
phenomenon known as Duvergers Law).

Such an electoral system, though, clearly does not represent the interests of all (or
even most) voters. In fact, since a candidate need have only a plurality of votes to be
elected, most voters may actually have voted against the winner (although their votes
are split among several candidates).
Elections for the House and Senate in the United States and for the House of
Commons in the United Kingdom use the plurality system. The US presidential
election is also generally considered a plurality system, but the existence of the
Electoral College actually makes it a strange hybrid of plurality and majority systems.

2. Majority electoral systems

Also called second ballot systems, majority electoral systems
attempt to provide for a greater degree of representativeness by
requiring that candidates achieve a majority of votes in order to win.
Majority is normally defined as 50%-plus-one-vote. If no candidate
gets a majority of votes, then a second round of voting is held (often
a week or so after the initial ballot). In the second round of voting,
only a select number of candidates from the first round are allowed
to participate. In some countries, such as Russia, the top two vote-
getters in the first round move on to the second round. In other
countries, such as France, all candidates with a minimum threshold
percentage of votes (in the French case, 12.5% of all registered
voters) move on to the second round. Like plurality systems,
majority systems usually rely on single-member constituencies, and
allow voters to indicate only one preference on their ballot.

Presidential elections in Austria, Finland, Portugal, Russia and other east European
states, as well as presidential and National Assembly elections in France, make use of
various forms of majority electoral systems. The US Electoral College also has
components of a majority system, because a presidential candidate must get 50%-
plus-one electoral votes (270 out of 538) in order to win. If no candidate reaches the
270 mark, the election is decided by the House of Representatives. In determining
who votes for whom in the Electoral College, though, the US presidential race is a
strict plurality system: The candidate who gets a plurality of the popular vote in a state
gets all that states electoral votes.

3. Proportional representation
Also known as PR, proportional representation is the general name
for a class of voting systems that attempt to make the percentage of
offices awarded to candidates reflect as closely as possible the
percentage of votes that they received in the election. It is the most
widely used set of electoral systems in the world, and its variants
can be found at some level of government in almost every country
(including the United States, where some city councils are elected
using forms of PR).

The most straightforward version of PR is simply to award a party the same

percentage of seats in parliament as it gets votes at the polls. Thus, if a party won 40%
of the vote it would receive 40% of the seats. However, there are clear problems with
such a system: Should parties that receive only 0.001% of the vote also be
represented? What happens if the voting percentages do not translate evenly into
seats? How do you award a party 19.5 seats if it got 19.5% of the vote? More
sophisticated PR systems attempt to get around these problems. Two of the most
widely used are discussed below.

Party list sytems

Under party list forms of PR, voters normally vote for parties rather
than for individual candidates. Under a closed party list
system the parties themselves determine who will fill the seats that
they have been allocated; voters vote only for a particular party,
and then it is up to the party to decide which party members will
actually serve as representatives. Legislative elections in Israel and
Germany are conducted according to such a system. Under an open
party list system, voters are given some degree of choice among
individual candidates, in addition to voting for entire parties.
Denmark, Finland, Italy, Luxembourg and Switzerland all have
versions of open party list systems.

Under all party list systems, though, one still needs some method for allocating seats
to individual parties. One commonly used method is named for the nineteenth-century
Belgian mathematician Victor dHondt, and is normally referred to as a highest
average method using the dHondt formula.

For example, assume that we have an election with 1,000 total voters in which five
parties (A, B, C, D, and E) have gained 100 (10%), 150 (15%), 300 (30%), 400
(40%), and 50 (5%) votes, respectively. Assume also that, in our electoral
constituency, there are 3 seats up for election; that all votes cast are valid; and that the
electoral system has a 7% vote threshold. (That is, parties must get at least 7% of the
total valid votes cast in order to participate in the distribution of seats.) Party E would
thus be elimiated from competition at the outset. The dHondt method of seat
allocation then proceeds in the following steps.

1. Place the total number of votes garnered by the competing parties (A, B, C, and D.
E has been eliminated) in a row.

100 150 300 400

2. Divide each figure in the row by 1, 2, 3, . . ., n. (How far you take the division
varies. The more seats you have to allocate, the further you have to divide. For our
purposes, 3 or 4 divisions should do the trick.)

Party A Party B Party C Party D

100 150 300 400

div. by 1 100 150 300 400

div. by 2 50 75 150 200

div. by 3 33 50 100 133

div. by 4 25 37.5 75 100

3. Pick the highest quotient in the list (including the quotients obtained by dividing the
votes by 1). The highest quotient is 400 in the Party D column. We therefore award
one seat to Party D.

4. Pick the next highest quotient in the list. The next highest quotient is 300 in the
Party C column. We therefore award one seat to Party C.

5. Pick the next highest quotient in the list. The next highest quotient is 200 in the
Party D column. We therefore award another seat to Party D. We have successfully
filled all the seats available in this constituency.

The final results of the election are therefore:

Party C 1 seat (or 33% of the total available seats)

Party D 2 seats (or 66% of the total available seats)
Notice why we call this system proportional representation: Under a plurality
system, Party D would have received 100% of the seats because that party received a
plurality (40%) of the vote--even though 60% of voters voted against Party D by
choosing other parties. Under PR, however, we are able to represent some of the
interests of the other voters. Party Ds representation in parliament is reduced to 66%
of seats, while Party Cs is increased to 33% of seats. The system yields a result that is
clearly not perfectly proportional. But the distribution more closely approximates the
actual percentage of votes that each party received than would a plurality or majority
system.

The dHondt method is only one way of allocating seats in party list systems. Other
methods include the Saint-Lague method where the divisor is the set of odd numbers
(1, 3, 5, 7, 9, . . ., n) and the modified Saint-Lague method used in Denmark, Norway
and Sweden, where the divisor is 1.4 plus the set of odd numbers (1.4, 3, 5, 7, 9, . . . ,
n). Other methods divide the votes by a mathematically derived quota, such as
the Droop quota or the Hare quota (see below)

One other feature of party list systems is called the vote threshold. Party list systems
normally establish by law an arbitrary percentage of the vote that parties have to pass
before they can be considered in the allocation of seats. The figure ranges from 0.67%
in the Netherlands to 5% in Germany and Russia, or even more. Any party that does
not reach the threshold is excluded from the calculation of seats. The vote threshold
simplifies the process of seat allocation and discourages fringe parties (those that are
likely to gain very few votes) from competing in the elections. Obviously, the higher
the vote threshold, the fewer the parties that will be represented in parliament.

Single transferable vote (STV)

STV is another important form of proportional representation. In

various forms, it is used widely in many countries, although only
Ireland, Australia, and Malta have used it in major national elections.
Other countries have used it in local elections, and even some
communities in the United States (such as Cambridge, MA) use it
today. Many student organizations in Europe also use this system for
election to university student associations, because it yields an even
more proportional result than party list systems, and certainly more
proportional than plurality or majority voting.
STV was originally developed by Thomas Hare (1806-1891), a British politician
whose writings greatly influenced the views of the philosopher John Stuart Mill.
Under STV, voters vote for individuals, not for parties as in the party list system. The
key feature of STV is that individual voters rank candidates according to their 1st,
2nd, 3rd, . . ., nth choices. Rather than simply voting for a single candidate, voters
have the opportunity to express a range of preferences for several candidates on the
ballot. Like party list systems, though, STV depends on having multi-member
constituencies.

The complicated part of STV is tabulating the seats to be awarded after the votes have
been cast. As with party list systems, there are a number of mathematical formulas
that one can use to accomplish this task. One of the most widely used methods is
known as the Droop quota, named for the nineteenth-century thinker and
mathematician H. R. Droop. The Droop quota is used to determine the minimal
number of votes that an individual candidate must get in order to be awarded a seat. It
is calculated using the formula:

[V/(S+1)] +1
where V is the total number of valid votes cast in the constituency, and S is the total
number seats up for election in the constituency. Hence, if we have 1,000 votes cast
for 3 seats, the Droop quota is [ 1,000 / (3 + 1) ] + 1 = 251. That means that any
candidate who is able to get at least 251 votes will be assured of winning a seat. Once
the Droop quota has been calculated and all the votes collected, we still have to
allocate the seats.

In this example, assume that we have 5 candidates (A, B, C, D, E) for 3 seats. In

accordance with STV, individual voters have ranked each of these candidates (1 to 5,
with one being the first-choice candidate) on their ballots. The allocation of seats then
proceeds according to the following steps--but remember that there are a variety of
STV methods in use. We will try to keep things very simple here:

1. Pull each ballot out of the ballot box one at a time and place them in piles according
to the first-choice candidate marked on the ballot (e.g., if a ballot indicates candidate
C as the first choice, place it in a pile marked C).
2. As soon as one pile of ballots reaches 251, that candidate is awarded a seat. Let us
assume that candidate C was the first to reach the Droop quota of 251 first-choice
ballots.

3. Continue drawing ballots out of the ballot box and placing them in piles according
to the first-choice candidate marked on the ballot. But since C has already been
elected, place any ballots that indicate candidate C as first choice in the pile of the
candidate indicated on that ballot as the voters second choice. For example, if you
pull out a ballot that indicates candidate C as first choice and candidate A as second
choice, place the ballot in the pile for candidate A, since candidate C has already been
awarded a seat. In this way candidate Cs surplus votes (i.e., the votes beyond those
needed to win a seat under the Droop quota) are transferred to the next-choice
candidate--hence the name single transferable vote.

4. Continue with Step 3 until another candidate reaches the 251 mark. Then, continue
carrying out Step 3 until you fill all the available seats. For example, let us assume
that we have already elected candidate C on first-choice ballots alone, and that by
combining second-choice ballots from candidate C with further first-choice ballots
from the box, we have also been able to award a seat to candidate A. How do we fill
the third seat? We continue in a similar manner as before. Any ballots that list
candidate C as the first-choice will be transferred to the second-choice candidate; if
the second-choice candidate turns out to be candidate A (who has also already been
elected), then we will transfer them to the third-choice candidate. Similarly, all first-
choice ballots for candidate A will be transferred to the second-choice candidate
indicated on the ballot; if the second-choice candidate turns out to be candidate C
(who has already been elected), the ballot is transferred to the third-choice candidate.
And so on.

5. But what happens if, after distributing all first-choice ballots, no further candidates
have reached the Droop quota and we still have empty seats to fill? In this case,
simply eliminate the candidate with the lowest number of first-choice ballots and
transfer those votes to the second-choice candidates. Repeat this step as many times as
necessary (always eliminating the lowest vote-getter) in order to reach the number of
votes mandated by the Droop quota.

As with party list systems, there are a variety of ways of conducting an STV election.
For example, instead of using the Droop quota, we might use the Hare quota (V / S)
or the Imperial quota [V / (S + 2)]. A countrys choice of which system to use
depends on its history and the degree to which policymakers value genuinely
proportional representation.

STV can clearly be rather confusing. Some voters may feel that a plurality system is
somehow more natural, or that STV and other forms of PR are simply tinkering
with the numbers. But PR in general, and STV in particular, can yield results that are
more truly representative of the choices of individual voters. There is a strong
movement for PR in the United Kingdom, with some political leaders arguing that
STV should replace the current plurality system for electing parliamentarians to the
House of Commons. There is a similar movement in the United States, although since
few Americans could even explain how the Electoral College works, they are
probably not going to learn STV any time soon.

A democratic electoral system can be said to be one where:

elections are regular and fair

votes are of equal value

the will of the majority is achieved

the interests of minorities are taken into consideration

there is a high level of participation by the electorate

there is the maximum possible franchise

voting is accessible

There are three main characteristics of any electoral system that

determine how it works:

District Magnitude this refers to the number of

representatives elected from the district or riding. These could
be single member ridings or multi-member ridings.

Ballot Structure this refers to the number of voting

 preferences given a voter on a ballot for them to mark. The
range of choices includes a single choice for a party or
candidate; a multiple preference between parties and
candidates; and weighting preferences between candidates by
rank-ordering them.

Electoral Formula this refers to the method by which votes

are turned into seats, given the district magnitude and ballot
structure being used. It could include thresholds stipulating
the percentage of votes necessary to get elected.

Types of Electoral System

There are several categorizations of electoral systems available. For
simplicity we will recognize four categories here.

Plurality Systems

Majority Systems

Proportional Reprsentation Systems

Mixed Systems

We should however point out that even though the specific

examples within each category may vary in a number of interesting
ways all of them have common characteristics and appear to
behave in similar ways with somewhat predictable consequences.
Plurality Systems
Also called first-past-the-post or winner-take-all systems,
plurality systems simply award a seat to the individual candidate
who receives the most votes in an election. The candidate need not
get a majority (50%+) of the vote to win; so long as he has a larger
number of votes than all other candidates, he is declared the
winner.

The main features of plurality systems are as follows:

Based on the principle that the contestant with the most

support ought to be elected.

Generally require simple and transparent voting and counting

processes.

Candidates are elected with a plurality (i.e. not a majority) of

votes cast.

Main models include: Single Member Plurality; Multi-Member

Plurality (also called Block Vote).

First past the post voting (FPP)

This system of vote counting is the simplest - the voter only votes
for one candidate and whoever gets the highest number of votes is
elected. It is the easiest vote counting system to calculate results.
The winning candidate is the one who gains more votes than any
other candidate, but not necessarily an absolute majority (50% +
1).

FPP is used in the United Kingdom, Canada, India, the United States
and many other countries.

Block vote (BV)

When the FPP system is used in multi-member electorates where

electors have as many votes as there are seats to be filled it is
known as the BV. Once a candidate is elected, all ballot papers are
returned to the count to elect the next member. The highest-polling
candidates fill the positions regardless of the percentage of the
votes they actually receive.

The BV is used in Bermuda, Laos, Thailand, Kuwait, the Philippines

and other countries.

Majority Systems
Also called second ballot systems, majority electoral systems
attempt to provide for a greater degree of representativeness by
requiring that candidates achieve a majority of votes in order to
win. Majority is normally defined as 50%-plus-one-vote. If no
candidate gets a majority of votes, then a second round of voting is
held (often a week or so after the initial ballot). In the second round
of voting, only a select number of candidates from the first round
are allowed to participate. In

The main features of majority systems are as follows:

Based on the principle that an elected representative should

be elected only if she or he has the support of more than half
of the voters.

May require preferential voting or more than one round of

voting if there are more than two candidates, or a natural
majority does not exist.

Candidates are elected with a majority (i.e. more than 50%) of

votes cast.

Main models include: Alternative Vote; Two-Round Vote.

Preferential voting (PV)

PV is usually used in single-member districts and gives electors

more options than FPP when marking their ballot paper. Electors
must rank all candidates by placing the number 1 for their
preferred candidate and consecutive numbers from 2 for their 2nd
choice, 3 for their 3rd choice and so on until all candidates are
numbered. A candidate who has an absolute majority of votes (50%
+ 1) is immediately elected.

If no candidate has an absolute majority, the candidate with the

lowest number of 1st preferences is eliminated, and their ballot
papers are examined for 2nd preferences to be assigned to
remaining candidates in the order as marked. The totals are then
checked and this process is repeated until one candidate has an
absolute majority.

PV is used in the Australian federal House of Representatives and in

some state Legislative Assemblies. PV is also used in Nauru.

Optional preferential voting (OPV)

In OPV electors place the number 1 for their preferred candidate

and this is enough for a valid vote. They may continue numbering
candidates in order of their preference to the extent they choose.
All candidates do not have to be ranked.

NSW uses OPV for the election of representatives in the Legislative

Assembly (Lower House) and in local government areas/wards for
mayoral elections and when one or two vacancies are to be filled.

Two round system (TRS)

The TRS is conducted in the same way as an FPP election and if a

candidate receives an absolute majority of votes, they are elected.
If no candidate receives an absolute majority a second round of
voting is conducted, often a week or two later and the winner of this
round is declared elected. The 2nd round may be a contest between
the two biggest vote winners (the Ukraine) or those who receive
over a certain percentage of the votes of the registered electorate
(France).

The TRS is used in countries such as France, Mali, Togo, Egypt, Iran,
Belarus and Ukraine.

Proportional Representation Systems

Proportional representation is the general name for a class of voting
systems that attempt to make the percentage of offices awarded to
candidates reflect as closely as possible the percentage of votes
that they received in the election. It is the most widely used set of
electoral systems in the world, and its variants can be found at
some level of government in almost every country (including the
United States, where some city councils are elected using forms of
PR).

The main features of Proportional Representation (PR) systems are

as follows:

Based on the assumption that parties are the real contestants

and the principle that their seat shares should accurately
reflect their vote shares

Requires multi-member districts (the bigger the more

proportional the final result can be)

Counting and seat determination processes are generally

complex and not immediately transparent

Candidates are elected based on the total percentage of votes

cast for their party.

Main models include: List; Mixed Member Proportional; Single

Transferable Vote; Single Non-Transferable Vote; Parallel.

List proportional representation (List PR)

Most PR systems use some form of List PR. List PR is used in multi-
member electorates where votes are cast in order of preference for
the parties which have registered a list of candidates. Parties
receive seats in proportion to their overall share of the total vote
and winning candidates are taken from the lists in order of their
position.

Mixed member proportional (MMP)

MMP systems try to combine the elements of majority and PR

systems. A proportion of the parliament is elected by majority
Mixed Systems
The main features of mixed systems are as follows:

Involve combinations of the other four basic families within a

single system

Generally designed to introduce an element of proportionality

May mix different types of electoral families across the entire

country, or mix different types in different parts of the country

Can produce legislators with different mandates, different

constituencies, different roles

Summary of Electoral Systems

The table below summarizes the range of different electoral
systems.
Electoral system Districts Type Description
first-past-the-post single- plurality The candidate that obtains more votes
(FPTP) member than any other is elected, even if that
person only won a minority of votes cast.
two-round system single- majority A runoff election is held between the two
(TRS) member top vote-getters, in order to ensure that the
winner obtains a majority of votes cast.
alternative vote single- majority Voters indicate an order of preference
(AV), or instant member among candidates. If no candidate obtains
runoff a majority outright, the last-place candidate
is removed, and the associated second-
choice votes are added to the totals of the
remaining candidates. The process is
repeated until a candidate secures a
majority.
block vote (BV) multiple- plurality Voters may cast as many votes as there
member are open seats. If there are n seats to be
filled, the top n vote-getters are elected.
single non- multiple- semi- Voters can only cast a single vote among
transferable vote member proportional candidates for n seats. The top n vote-
(SNTV) getters are elected.
single multiple- proportional Voters indicate an order of preference
transferable vote member among candidates. Candidates whose first-
(STV), also choice vote totals attain the Hare Quota
known as (votes cast/n+1) + 1 are elected. The
preference or last-place candidate is removed, and the
choice voting associated second-choice votes are added
to the totals of the remaining candidates.
The process is repeated until all n seats
are filled.
mixed member mixed proportional The legislature consists of a block of seats
proportional that are elected by plurality or majority from
(MMP) single-member districts, and another block
of seats that are elected in multi-member
districts under a proportional system. The
proportional seats are awarded in such a
way as to compensate for disproportional
effects in the single-member district
outcomes.
parallel mixed semi- The legislature consists of a block of seats
proportional that are elected by plurality or majority from
single-member districts, and another block
of seats that are elected in multi-member
districts under a proportional system. The
proportional seats are awarded
independently of the outcomes in single-
member districts.
party list multiple- proportional Voters choose from among party lists, and
member seats are awarded in proportion to the vote
received by each party. Candidates are
seated in the order listed.

Trends in Use of Electoral Systems

 Early electoral systems were mainly based on the Plurality
principle

During the 19th century Majority systems became more

popular and more widely adopted

Proportional Representation list systems were widely adopted

in the opening decades of the 20th century, often at the time
the right to vote was being expanded. They were seen as a
way of ensuring that no one group (for instance, working class
socialists) would be able to capture a majority

Curiously, Proportional Representation systems made little

headway in the democracies that were descended from the
British parliament (with the exceptions of the adoption of the
Single Transferable Vote by Ireland and Tasmania).

o Australian upper houses began adopting Single

Transferable Vote in 1949 and now over half have done
so.

In the last decade of the 20th century there was a sudden

revival of interest in electoral system change, reform and
experimentation:

o the creation of new democracies in once Communist

parts of Eastern Europe

o the decision of established democracies to try and

change their politics by altering their electoral system.

Some went from plurality to PR (New Zealand), others moved

in the other direction (Italy) while others moved to new
complicated mixed systems (Japan)

o the adoption by Britain of different systems for different

elections

The recent past has seen a sharp growth in the interest in

proportional electoral arrangements and the adoption of Mixed
 electoral systems in an attempt to reap the perceived benefits
of more than one type of electoral family.

Types of Electoral Systems

electoral distric
type description
system ts

The candidate that obtains more

single-
first-past-the- votes than any other is elected, even
membe plurality
post (FPTP) if that person only won a minority of
r
votes cast

A runoff election is held between the

single-
two-round two top vote-getters, in order to
membe majority
system (TRS) ensure that the winner obtains a
r
majority of votes cast

alternative single- majority Voters indicate an order of

vote (AV), or membe preference among candidates. If no
instant runoff r candidate obtains a majority
outright, the last-place candidate is
removed, and the associated second-
choice votes are added to the totals
of the remaining candidates. The
process is repeated until a candidate
 secures a majority.

multipl Voters may cast as many votes as

block vote e- there are open seats. If there are n
plurality
(BV) membe seats to be filled, the top n vote-
r getters are elected

multipl
single non- Voters can only cast a single vote
e- semi-
transferable among candidates for n seats. The
membe proportional
vote (SNTV) top n vote-getters are elected.
r

Voters indicate an order of

preference among candidates.
single Candidates whose first-choice vote
transferable multipl totals attain the Hare Quota(votes
vote (STV), e- cast/n+1) + 1 are elected. The
proportional
also known as membe last-place candidate is removed, and
preference or r the associated second-choice votes
choice voting are added to the totals of the
remaining candidates. The process is
repeated until all n seats are filled.

The legislature consists of a block of

seats that are elected by plurality or
majority from single-member
mixed districts, and another block of seats
member that are elected in multi-member
mixed proportional
proportional districts under a proportional system.
(MMP) The proportional seats are awarded
in such a way as to compensate for
disproportional effects in the single-
member district outcomes.

parallel mixed semi- The legislature consists of a block of

proportional seats that are elected by plurality or
majority from single-member
districts, and another block of seats
that are elected in multi-member
districts under a proportional system.
The proportional seats are awarded
independently of the outcomes in
 single-member districts.

Voters choose from among party

multipl
lists, and seats are awarded in
e-
party list proportional proportion to the vote received by
membe
each party. Candidates are seated in
r
the order listed.