Washington State's Perfect Voting System

2558 Words11 Pages
Rossi led Gregoire by only 260 votes in Washington State’s 2004 Governor’s Race. This was the outcome of the first voting results in Washington state’s Governor’s Race, and as with any race this close; calling for a recount was Rossi’s only option, as it was also mandatory since the spread was less than 2,000 votes, and called for a machine recount, since only a hand recount is called if the spread is less than 150. Three counts of nearly 3 million ballots, four lawsuits, and seven weeks later the state of Washington discovered that what was thought to be a simple recount, turned into months of unfairness and disharmony. After the first machine recount Gregoire was only 42 counts behind, which by law, called for yet another count, but this…show more content…
Fairness and harmony are two of the values we will consider for this paper. Fairness and harmony will be considered within three different categories: voting methods, voting tabulation, and recounting. There will never be a perfect voting system, but there can be a voting system that is most efficient. Before we consider how to find this system, we must define define fairness and harmony to better understand how to fill those necessities. Fairness according to Webster’s Dictionary is: Fairness is “marked by impartiality and honesty: free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism” Fairness, I believe, is the most important thing to consider in a voting system, after all voters do not only pursue their own political interests when they vote, they also care about fairness. To further understand what fairness entails other than just a simple definition we will apply the fairness criteria set forth by University of Alabama. There are many different criteria when dealing with fairness, but we will only consider two of them, they are as follows: The Majority Criterion, the Condorcet Criterion, and the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives Criterion. The Majority Criterion states: “Any candidate receiving a majority of first place votes should be the winner.” In other words, this means that if candidate A receives 100 first place votes, while Candidate B received 98 votes, and declaring the B the winning would be deemed…show more content…
The first mini method that applies to the agenda is called Bets and Odds. This method calls for a question: What odds will you give that the presumption proves correct? This question is what our agenda is completely made up of. Odds of inerrancy which the state must take into consideration, because no matter what method of voting there will always be margins for errors, but if we repeat the method enough times, we will eventually come out with the correct answer. When asking yourself this question it puts the state on the honor system. If they answer this question with doubt in their voting method, then they should redo the method, or come up with one that they feel confident about. My agenda I am completely confident about if it is used correctly, due to the plethora of stages the ballots must be counted in, there is a small margin for error. There are four different steps when considering the odds of error and fairness within a voting system. The first step is to “ask what odds will your give that the presumption proves correct?” Step two is to “require each to specify what makes his answer different from the others.” Step three is to “Encourage argument, promote articulation of differences.” And the fourth step is to “review presumption accordingly.” All these questions must be asked when going through my agenda before the next step in counting the ballots is carried on. Another mini

More about Washington State's Perfect Voting System

Open Document