| A joint Politics and Economics series |
| Social choice and electoral systems |
|---|
 |
 Mathematics portal |
 | This article or section appears to contradict itself on the invention of the top-four system. (August 2024) |
A final-four or final-five primary is an electoral system using a nonpartisan primary by multi-winner plurality in the first step.[1][2]
Up to four or five candidates, those with the most votes from the primary, regardless of the political party, then undergo a first round of single non-transferable vote (SNTV) voting. The round two (general) election, held some weeks later, uses instant-runoff voting (IRV, also known as ranked-choice voting, RCV) to select a winner among these top candidates.[3][4]
The system has been criticized for eliminating most if not all, of the theoretical advantages of RCV-IRV over the two-round system by reintroducing vote splitting into the primary procedure, restoring a second (costly) primary election, and delegating much of the decision-making to an unrepresentative, low-turnout primary election.
The Final-Four Voting system was first proposed by businessmen Katherine Gehl and Michael Porter in a 2017 report entitled "Why Competition in the Politics Industry is Failing America".[5] It was first advocated by FairVote in 2012.[6][7] FairVote proposed a statutory model in 2015.[8]
It was first used in the 2022 Alaska special election. In the first round of the general election, Republican votes were split between first-rank preferences for Palin and Peltola, creating a spoiler effect known as a center squeeze.[9][10][11] Begich was eliminated first (although he had received a higher number of votes in the blanket primary than either of the remaining two candidates.)[12][13][14][15] In the final runoff, Begich voters transferred their choices to Palin and Peltola, and Peltola won. Despite Begich's greater overall popularity, Palin's second-choice votes were not allowed to transfer to Begich (which would have allowed Begich to win the election).
A top-four primary can be seen as a variation of a two-round system, in which the second round (general election) is always held, even if a candidate gains a majority in the first (primary) round. A candidate receiving 20% of the primary vote is logically guaranteed to pass a top-four primary.[16] One variation, called Final Five Voting, allows five candidates to pass the open primary.[17]
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
afbewas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ "Missouri Top-Four Ranked Choice Voting Elections for Local, State, and Federal Officials Initiative (2022)".
- ^ "Top-four primary (ballotpedia.org)".
- ^ "OPINION: Voters in Florida and Alaska both did the right thing on open-primary initiatives". December 2020.
- ^ Gehl & Porter (September 2017). "Why Competition In The Politics Industry Is Failing America" (PDF). Harvard Business School. Retrieved May 7, 2024.
- ^ Fixing Top Two in California The 2012 Elections and a Prescription for Further Reform
- ^ Top Four FairVote August 2013
- ^ "FAIRVOTE'S 2015 POLICY GUIDE: MODEL STATUTORY LANGUAGE".
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
:0was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
:1was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
:2was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
:3was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
:4was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
:5was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
:6was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Top Four Why Top Four Gives More Voice to Voters (FairVote)
- ^ "Final-Five Voting".