Weighted voting systems are voting systems based on the idea that not all voters are equal. Instead, it can be desirable to recognize differences by giving voters different amounts of say (weights) concerning the outcome of an election. This is in contrast to normal parliamentary procedure, which assumes that each member's vote carries equal weight. This type of voting system is used in everything from shareholder meetings, where votes are weighted by the number of shares that each shareholder owns, to the United States Electoral College. This typer of voting has been used elsewhere in the world throughout history.
The Roman assemblies provided for weighted voting after the person's tribal affiliation and social class (i.e. wealth). Rather than counting one vote per citizen, the assemblies convened in blocs, with the plurality of voters in each bloc deciding the vote of the bloc as an entity. Men of certain tribes and a higher social standing convened in smaller blocs, thus giving their individual vote the effect of many poor citizens' votes. In the Plebeian Council, where only the plebs could participate, these effects were somewhat relaxed, thus making the decision to grant its decisions the full force of law controversial.
In several Western democracies, such as Sweden weighted voting preceded equal and universal suffrage, as well as women's suffrage, to different extents. In Sweden, universal and equal male suffrage to the lower house was introduced by Arvid Lindman's first cabinet, while voting for city and county councils, which indirectly decided the composition of the upper house, was graded along a 40-degree scale. Certain corporations also had votes of their own, thus multiplying the political strength of its owners. Weighted voting was abolished in Nils Eden's reforms of 1918-19, when female suffrage was also introduced.
This is an interesting way of voting, but I can already imagine several problems the U.S. would face if we ever tried to adopt this voting style. It's unfortunate that your class and amount of money you had dictated your voting status. Just because the person wasn't of a higher class shouldn't have meant their opinions counted any less.
ReplyDeleteThis was very different how they went about using the weighted voting system. I did not like how just because if you were richer or poorer meant how much more your vote would have counted. I also did not like how it mentions about women suffrage. It should have not mattered about money or sex your vote should count no matter what.
ReplyDeleteI don’t like this system of voting. I prefer systems in which everyone’s vote counts the same. Weighted voting just seems to promote inequality. Women were not allowed to vote and the rich got more votes than the poor. This means that the majority of laws passed would mostly benefit wealthy males and may have had little to no benefit for other groups.
ReplyDeleteThis system is unique but I however don't like it. I think all voting systems should have all votes be the same and be equal. Overall I agree with Steven!
ReplyDeleteI like anything that isn't the Huntington- Hill method. I thought the bit about the Romans was pretty interesting. Kind of sad some countries today don't have any type of voting system set up, although a death match would mean we have at least a strong leader and not the best liar.
ReplyDeleteI like anything that isn't the Huntington- Hill method. I thought the bit about the Romans was pretty interesting. Kind of sad some countries today don't have any type of voting system set up, although a death match would mean we have at least a strong leader and not the best liar.
ReplyDeleteI understand that the wealthy class is on average smarter than those without such wealth. With richer people getting more of vote, they will vote on such propositions that will benefit them. Making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
ReplyDeleteI do not like this voting method because it is unfair. Why wouldn't each vote be equal? This may sound a little dumb but the Constitution is still in effect correct? if everyone was created equally, and had freedom of speech, wouldn't that make a vote under any circumstance equal?
ReplyDeleteWeighted voting systems on the whole are unjust. I do not believe they are effective forms of representation and dont voice concerns equally within the democratic system. However, it would be interesting to see how a weighted voting system would work in the legislative process. Assume that the party that controls the house, or the senates vote is worth more in those respective groups. It could help solve a lot of congressional deadlocks that occur. While Iam not pushing for this I think it would be an awesome expriement.
ReplyDelete