New Senate voting system

[medhead]

I think there was another thread on the news of this change when it happened. Maybe this thread should merge. But having voted today, I'm having questions about the mechanics of the new system. I think there might be a risk of votes going to waste. During this election we are electing 12 senators per state. Ballot instructions are to vote for at least 12 below the line. The south australian ballot has 64 people running. It is certainly very easy to pick 12 people who have no chance of being elected.
What happens if a ballot gets to its 12th preference and hasn't been extinguished and needs to be distributed to a non-existent 13th preference? Will some voters be disenfranchised, or considered informal? Will AEC track this, will we be made aware of any ballots that don't elect someone? If a big problem will they amend the legislation?

 

[RooFlyer]

Good question. I wonder if Anthony Green of the ABC takes questions on-line?

 

[medhead]

Good question. I wonder if Anthony Green of the ABC takes questions on-line?

It just occurred to me that there might be some risk that my vote might get wasted, as I vote from the bottom up for parties. My ballot should land on the number 3 or 4 position for one party, but if that person doesn't get up I expect my later preference people will already be elected or eliminated.

Might seek out Green online.

 

[medhead]

It seems that the vote is lost. Not sure how I feel about potentially being disenfranchised. Should've numbered more boxes I suppose.

Should I keep numbering beyond 6/12?
The most effective way to vote is to express a preference for every candidate who has any chance of being elected. That ensures that your vote will be live and taking part in the choice between candidates for the final vacancy. If your ballot paper runs out of numbers and 'exhausts' its preferences, it will not take part in choosing the last candidate elected.

Antony Green's Election Blog: 2016 Senate Calculator Plus Tips on the New Senate Voting System

 

[Hvr]

The other issue with the new system is counting the votes.

"Counting above-the-line votes was easy, you just tally the number of 1s in each box and that was 95 per cent of the count done," he said.


"Those of us that voted below the line, presented them [the AEC] with an enormous data-entry challenge, keying in every single one of those votes.


"The challenge now is they've gone from entering 500,000 ballots, if that, to more than 12 million and it occurred to me that it wasn't going to be easy."

Electoral commission grapples with counting votes in new Senate system

Don't be surprised by how long it takes for a rough count to be done let alone the final count and actual Senators declared for each state.

This may hamper the forming of a government if there is a hung parliament and the minor parties with Senators want to know exactly where they stand.

 

[Boca68]

snip.....

What happens if a ballot gets to its 12th preference and hasn't been extinguished and needs to be distributed to a non-existent 13th preference? Will some voters be disenfranchised, or considered informal? Will AEC track this, will we be made aware of any ballots that don't elect someone? If a big problem will they amend the legislation?

Seriously?

That's your biggest concern? Hope your taking the pith.

For that unfortunate 13th preference....survival of the fittest, not biggest 'how to vote card'

 

[whatmeworry]

I voted 116 boxes under the line in Victoria.

My tactic was to ensure the person I was voting for got the vote and not their party, with which they could do with if I let them.

My reasoning was to vote for that person at 2, with someone that had no chance like a independent. Even the person I voted wasn't their first choice.

Then I ensured my vote could only go to my intended person without it ever going to someone else in their party by poisoning the well with a number of their opponents before going back to party..

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

The NSW senate ticket has gone from 1m wide to about 1.3m wide. They will need larger polling booths next...

 

[medhead]

The other issue with the new system is counting the votes.

Don't be surprised by how long it takes for a rough count to be done let alone the final count and actual Senators declared for each state.

This may hamper the forming of a government if there is a hung parliament and the minor parties with Senators want to know exactly where they stand.

Antony Green reckons it'll be a lot quicker because of the disappearing votes that I've now realised will happen. Anything getting to the end of the indicated preferences will just be thrown out.

I voted 116 boxes under the line in Victoria.

My tactic was to ensure the person I was voting for got the vote and not their party, with which they could do with if I let them.

My reasoning was to vote for that person at 2, with someone that had no chance like a independent. Even the person I voted wasn't their first choice.

Then I ensured my vote could only go to my intended person without it ever going to someone else in their party by poisoning the well with a number of their opponents before going back to party..

In hindsight I should've done that. In the past I've employed a different tactic of voting the back markers in a pattern to ensure maximum handling of my ballot paper. I'm keeping those AEC employees in a job. I would normally get to my preferred person around the mid-point on the ballot.

Seriously?

That's your biggest concern? Hope your taking the pith.

For that unfortunate 13th preference....survival of the fittest, not biggest 'how to vote card'

Yes, seriously. I have a major problem with having my vote wasted, with being disenfranchised, because of the voting system when I've followed the instructions given. I don't give a damn about the 13th person, I care about my vote disappearing into nothing.

 

[Moindardt]

We pre-polled when it opened and everyone there was laughing and the difficulty of having paper up both sides of the voting booth. It will be mayhem next week. So glad we are not around for it.

 

[whatmeworry]

When the senate paper is that big, you got to be careful with the numbering when you vote from one side to the other.

 

[yohy?!]

the way i understood it if you only voted 1-12 then after that your vote was exhausted

 

[medhead]

the way i understood it if you only voted 1-12 then after that your vote was exhausted

It would depend on how you vote and whether it gets taken up in electing the 12 people. but you've clearly thought about it more than me. I'm surprised that there is now a situation that votes do nothing, and that the final couple of elected senators might be elected on less than a quota. There's a bit more of a sting in the tail of this new system than I previously thought.

 

[medhead]

When the senate paper is that big, you got to be careful with the numbering when you vote from one side to the other.

there was a website last time that let me print out the ballot properly numbered. It was then a simple matter to move across the ballot and copy the votes. Can't find it right now.

 

[theblank]

The thing I dont understand is that if we number all the boxes above the line, do the independents at the "end" have a box above?
I get the impressiion that to vote for these independants then we must vote below.

 

[medhead]

The thing I dont understand is that if we number all the boxes above the line, do the independents at the "end" have a box above?
I get the impressiion that to vote for these independants then we must vote below.

I agree and was pondering that as well. the example shown here seems to say no box. Voting in the Senate - Australian Electoral Commission

So you would have to vote below the line, I guess. A 1 below the line for an independent with 2 to 6 above the line would risk being informal I suspect.

 

[CMA222]

...........So you would have to vote below the line, I guess. A 1 below the line for an independent with 2 to 6 above the line would risk being informal I suspect.

Its strictly an either / or situation. Either above the line or below the line and any combination would make the vote informal. The independents have not been "grouped" because they are independent, so to vote for them requires a below the line vote.

 

[vetrade]

It's just a vote. Can't see the point of going out of your way to complicate it or intentionally waste peoples' time trying to decipher your numbering. Agree the new system has flaws that's not going to change between now and July 2.

 

[Skyring]

It's just a vote. Can't see the point of going out of your way to complicate it or intentionally waste peoples' time trying to decipher your numbering. Agree the new system has flaws that's not going to change between now and July 2.

It's democracy. Let every citizen have the maximum ability to cast their vote exactly as they wish without interference or patronising.

I'll vote as I always have. Below the line, and for the independents first. I always give my first vote to some no-hoper to ensure that the Commonwealth doesn't hand out any electoral funding on my behalf. Then if there's any candidate(s) I really love, they get my next numbers. After that, well, I usually go from the bottom upwards, numbering last all those people and parties I think least fit to represent me.

I don't worry too much about the work of those counting votes. That's not my job. My job is to vote.

If we voted so as to make it easy for the AEC, then we'd be voting in line with the wishes of one or the other of the major parties, and quite frankly, I think that's a very poor use of democracy.

 

[vetrade]

100% agree, Skyring. I thought I qualified my comment with "going out of your way" and "intentionally wasting peoples' time" so as to sufficiently differentiate between having a reasoned methodology and just screwing people around for the fun of it, which some earlier posts seemed to imply.