Phone: 555-555-5555 Fax: 555-555-5555 Email: xyz@microsoft.com

Primary Business Address Your Address Line 2 Your Address Line 3 Your Address Line 4

Back Panel Heading

Center for Voting and Democracy

Organization

Caption describing picture or graphic.

Our nation’s current winner take all system leaves few opportunities for young people’s voices to be heard. With so many youth left voiceless at all levels of government, it is no wonder we continue to see turnout numbers that reflect this sense of hopelessness.
In a recent survey conducted on undergraduate students by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics, it was found that 83.5 % said that they had not been contacted by any political party during the 2000 election season.
With many young adults and college students finding little reason to turn out on election day and candidates spending even less effort courting their vote — we must examine the system that has created such a dilemma.
There is an alternative. Through the use of Full Representation voting systems, young people on college campuses and in communities where their views are not the majority will be able to gain representation. Full Representation increases competiveness of races and expands the diversity and scope of the issues being brought to the table.
The principle of “full representation” voting systems—also called “proportional representation” - is a powerful one: the right of decision belongs to a majority, but the right of representation belongs to all. Proportional representation systems allow groupings of voters to elect a fair share of candidates. Gaining more than half of the popular vote wins a majority of the seats, but not all. One-fifth of the vote wins one in five seats rather than none. Proportional representation means representative democracy.

YOUTH and the ISSUES

Primary Business Address Your Address Line 2 Your Address Line 3 Your Address Line 4

Phone: 555-555-5555 Fax: 555-555-5555 Email: xyz@microsoft.com

Center for Voting and Democracy

Caption describing picture or graphic.

This is a good place to briefly, but effectively, summarize your products or services. Sales copy is typically not included here.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diem nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut lacreet dolor et accumsan.

Alternative Election Systems
Limited Voting - Voters are required to cast fewer votes than the number of seats, or parties are required to nominate fewer candidates than there are seats. Winners are determined by totaling all votes cast. The greater the difference between the number of votes and the number of seats, the greater the opportunities for fair representation. Limited voting has been adopted recently in several North Carolina and Alabama localities and for decades has been used in many northeastern municipalities.
Cumulative Voting - Voters cast as many votes as there are seats, but are not limited to giving a candidate one vote. Instead, they can concentrate their votes on one or more candidates. Winning candidates are determined by a simple plurality of votes cast. Cumulative voting is used in Peoria (IL), Chilton County (AL) and more than fifty Texas localities, including Amarillo. It was used to elect the Illinois state assembly from 1870 to 1980.
Choice Voting - Voters rank (1st choice, 2nd choice, etc.) as many candidates as they wish. Candidates win by reaching a "victory threshold" of 1st-choice votes roughly equal to the number of votes divided by the number of seats. Ballots are counted for next-choice candidates if a higher choice loses. These rankings facilitate coalition-building and participation. Used to elect the city council in Cambridge (MA), Choice voting is also called “single transferable vote” and “preference voting.”
Instant Runoff Voting – Like choice voting, but only one candidate wins. Voters rank as many candidates as they wish (1, 2, 3 and so on). The candidate with the fewest first-choice votes loses. Ballots from this candidate are counted for the next choice indicated on each ballot. This process continues until one candidate has a majority. In 2002 San Francisco adopted IRV in a referendum. IRV is currently under strong consideration in numerous other jurisdictions.

“Making Your Vote Count”

Mobilizing YOUTH for Electoral Reform

A project of
The Center For Voting and Democracy

Voting systems that work!
In Texas, cumulative voting is real ! In 1999 with a population of more than 150,000 people, the Amarillo Independent School District became the nation’s largest city to adopt cumulative voting. Amarillo, which, previously had no minority representation now has one African American and two Latina board members.
In Chilton County, Alabama, Bobby Agee in 1988 became the first African American elected to the Chilton County Commission even though blacks comprise only 12 percent of the population. Now serving his fourth term, his success is attributed to cumulative voting which was implemented the first year he was elected. Mr. Agee has been elected to chair the commission several times by his white colleagues.
Cumulative voting was used to elect the Illinois State House of Representatives from 1870 to 1980. Harold Washington and Carol Moseley-Braun were elected to the state’s house of representatives under this system. Governor George Ryan (R), Senate Minority Leader Emil Jones (D), and many others support its return.
In several Alabama areas, an increase in turnout and the success of women elected to city council and school boards are attributed to the implementation of cumulative voting or limited voting in those areas.
In 1993, Jamesville, North Carolina elected two black commissioners for the first time in the town’s history (two out of five.) This is in proportion to the 40 percent black population in Jamesville. Several localities along North Carolina’s coastal plain use limited voting. Limited voting was used as a remedy which did not distort district lines or create judicial challenges to the redistricting process.
Cambridge, Massachusetts has used choice voting (also called the ‘single transferable vote,’ or ‘preference voting’) to elect city council members since 1941. Blacks comprise only 13 percent of the population in Cambridge but have had near-continuous representation on the city council and school committee for decades.
New York City uses choice voting for local school board elections. Under this system there is significant representation of African Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans. The Department of Justice refused to pre-clear a plan to modify the system because changing this election method might dilute minority voting strength.. Cincinnati, Ohio, used choice voting from 1925-1957. Blacks served on ten of the fifteen councils elected during this period and a number of reforms in racial policies were initiated.
Either Instant Run-off Voting or a form of Proportional Representation is used to elect student government leaders at many colleges and universities, some them are: The University of California at Berkeley, Carleton College (Northfield, MN), The California Institute of Technology, Cornell University, Harvard University, University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), Johns Hopkins University, Lane Community College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Metropolitan State University, University of Maryland (College Park), Stanford University, University of Washington, Whitman College.

Who are we?
The Center for Voting
and Democracy
We are dedicated to fair elections where every vote counts and all voters are represented. As a catalyst for reform, we conduct research, analysis, education and advocacy to build understanding of and support for more democratic voting systems.
The Center’s mission is founded on the belief that our voting system can be reformed at all levels of government in order to increase vitality in our democracy, ensure fairer representation of our society’s diversity in elected bodies, and assist local, state, and national governments in their efforts toward solving the complex issues facing our nation. CVD has a comprehensive website and a wide array of public education materials, provides legal assistance in voting rights cases, and holds workshops in communities and at conferences around the country.

For more information
Contact:
Rashad Robinson
Full Representation Project Coordinator
Center for Voting and Democracy
6930 Carroll Ave. Suite 610
Takoma Park, MD 20912
Phone (301) 270-4616
Fax (301) 270-4133
robinson@fairvote.org
www.fairvote.org

Mobilizing Young People for Electoral Reform

Throughout our history, movements for better government, civil rights and real democracy have thrived off the efforts of young people.
We believe the struggle for better representation and systems that give us all a right at the polls, has far reaching implications for young adults.
As many organizations and individuals work to increase and improve turnout it is important that we examine the electoral systems in use today. Our current winner take all system far too often leaves little to the imagination. Our elections are becoming less and less competitive, creating an even tougher challenge to increase turnout.
It is our hope that through a series of workshops, presentations and conference calls we will be able to further the dialogue among young people in communities and on college campuses about the need for real electoral reform.
Getting young adults mobilized to advocate for better election systems in their communities and on college campuses will increase our ability to hold elected officials accountable and give us the power to make a real difference at the polls.