On November 6, a U.S. District Court ruled orally that Port Chester, New York, should use Cumulative Voting for its elections for Village Trustee. In 2006, the U.S. Justice Department, Voting Rights Section, had sued to force Port Chester to stop using at-large elections for Village Trustee. Almost half the population is Hispanic, but no Hispanic had ever been able to win an election for that office.
The case is USA v Village of Port Chester, 06cv-15173. The judge’s explanation will be issued soon. Cumulative voting, used in some multi-winner elections, gives each voter multiple votes. The voter can give all his or her votes to one candidate, or spread them around to several candidates. It enables groups that are less than a majority to put all their strength behind a single candidate, and give that candidate a fair chance at winning.
The judge had made his original ruling in January 2008. On October 22 of the US Attorney wrote the judge to “respectfully” (language in the letter) to get off his duff (my interpolation) and issue a ruling. The DOJ sought single member districts, while the Village advocated cumulative voting.
Currently the 6-member board of trustees has one vacancy, 2 appointees, and 3 members serving expired terms (apparently the judge enjoined holding of any elections). The board recently declined to make another appointment to the board.
Cumulative voting requires that both candidates and voters know how to play the game. If your segment of the community “deserves” (in proportional terms) one seat on the council or board, this is fairly easy. You run one candidate and all of her supporters give her all of their votes. But if you have enough support to win two or more seats, it gets tricky. You have to run the right number of candidates, to avoid vote splitting, and instruct your voters in detail on who should use their votes for which members of the slate.
This need for information and strategy means that choice voting (STV) is a much better method than cumulative voting. But, so far, both judges and voting rights advocates have preferred cumulative voting and the limited vote.
I think these cases are very important, both in their own right as a matter of justice for minority voters, and as a step toward electoral reform affecting everyone. I’m very glad that Richard consistently covers them.
What century will GENIUS lawyers and judges detect that —
Total Votes / Total Seats = EQUAL votes for each seat winner
= P.R. = REAL Democracy = ALL voters get representation on legislative bodies.
Other option — Each seat winner has a voting power equal to the votes he/she gets.
Need a TV Price is Right adding machine for larger bodies — computer spreadsheet child’s play.