Talk:Question P

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Question P is part of WikiProject Maryland, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Maryland.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referenda, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decisionmaking. For more information, visit our project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale.

Question: how were the candidates election when there were three-member districts?

Tabletop 06:00, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Does the change achieve its aim?

It is not clear that the change to the voting system achieves its stated aim of helping less-established candidates run and win.

"Less-established" is taken to mean "minor party" or "not one of the two major parties (R) or (D)".

If the previous system elected 3 members in 6 electorates using some kind of proportional representation such as Choice Voting, STV or Cummulative Voting, then that implies a hurdle of about 25% to get elected.

Proposition P, introduces 1 member electorates with a hurdle of 51%, which is twice as difficult for less-established members.

If the previous system was some kind of at-large voting within each 3 member electorate and each voter having 3 votes, then that system is liable to elect lopsided results, 3x(R) or 3x(D), and only occasionally mixed results such as 1x(R)+2x(D) or 2x(R)+1x(D).

In that case having 14 x 1 member electorates is more likely to have a mixture of (R) and (D), depending on how the electorate borders are gerrymandered.

The 14 x 1 member system only really helps less-established candidates if their supporters are concentrated in particular electorates.

The 14 x 1 member system is of little help for less-established candidates whose support is spread evenly over the whole city.

Under the previous system, each district had three representatives, and each voter cast up to three equally weighted votes. The new system improves accountability at the district level, as every constituent has a single representative. It also gives "outsider" candidates a somewhat better chance because the district they have to canvas is smaller and thus less costly to cover. It is true that, for example, keeping the three-member districts and moving to a single-transferrable vote system might have opened things up for more proportionality.

Baltimore is an overwhelmingly Democratic city. Before and after the change, the city council was and is entirely Democratic. The real electoral action is in the Democratic primary; however, because of a one-time quirk in Baltimore electoral law, the primary election for the first post-Question P council was in September 2003 and the general election November *2004*. This meant that less-established candidates didn't really have a chance to get an organization going in time for the primary election; this combined with the fact that the new districts were gerrymanded to favor the incumbent council members to return most incumbants to office. The general election did see some Republican and Green candidates get closer to the Democratic victors than usual, but no race was really competitive. The next council election may be more competitive, at least at the primary level. --Jfruh 21:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

In the previous system, could a voter cast all three votes for the same candidate, or had the votes to be cast for three different candidates? Illinois once had a voting system that allowed voters to cast their three votes to one, two or three candidates, and this system did result in some D victors in R strongholds and visa versa. This system was abolished when other changes were done around 1960. The members of the state congrss apparently did not notice this little clause being snuck in in the bill.

Voters could not cast multiple times for the same person. Voting went strictly along bloc voting lines. --Jfruh (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)