Electoral reform in the U.S. United States - the history, the various election systems

Here's info on course of ER in the U.S., with referendums and such

I think Alaska's adoption of (non-PR) IRV was done by referendum,

and perhaps Maine's,

but otherwise none perhaps.

here's some rough notes:

federally

presidential election

single winner so no chance for PR

reform of electoral college - 

a few states do not use general ticket method to elect all their EC members as one block.

several states have signed onto the National Popular Vote Compact

some state-level moves toward electoral reform of Electoral college elections

2004 Colorado Democrats sought change in how Electora college seats were filled.

2012 Pennsylvania proposed changing from WTA general ticket allocation of electoral college seat to EC members being elected based on congressional districts.

2011 Republicans in Wisconsin proposed changing from WTA general ticket allocation of electoral college seat to EC members being elected based on congressional districts.

around 2011 Republicans in Nebraska proposed changing from EC members being elected based on congressional districts, to WTA general ticket allocation of electoral college seats.

Senate (elected one at a  time in each state in staggered terms)

no switch to PR to report

House of Representatives

no switch to PR to report

Forty-six states use the first-past-the-post voting plurality-win system to elect their representatives.

six states have only one representative: Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming." so no PR possible there

40 other states elect multiple members but PR not used.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is used in two states (Alaska and Maine) 

Two-round system (TRS) is used in two states (Georgia and Louisiana)

The proposed Fair Representation Act would require multi-member districts for elections to the US House of Representatives which would then be elected by STV.

if passed, the FRA would:

-Create multi-member districts for elections to the House of Representatives, with each district having 3 to 5 members. States with only one representative would instead have elections by instant runoff voting.

-Require the use of ranked votes , in particular STV, to elect members to the House.

===

Already in 1787, James Wilson (1742-1798), a Founding Father of the U.S. as an independent country, understood the importance of multiple-member districts:

"Bad elections proceed from the smallness of the districts which give an opportunity to bad men to intrigue themselves into office",and again, in 1791, in his Lectures on Law: "It may, I believe, be assumed as a general maxim, of no small importance in democratical governments, that the more extensive the district of election is, the choice will be the more wise and enlightened". (from Wilson, James (1804). "Vol 2, Part II, Ch.1 Of the constitutions of the United States and of Pennsylvania – Of the legislative department, I, of the election of its members". The Works of the Honourable James Wilson. Constitution Society. Retrieved 5 August 2014.

as cited in Wiki "Proportional Representation")

Redistricting of HofR districts

The last MMDs used to elect national-level legislators were disbanded in 1842.

==========================================================

State elections

governor 

single winner so no chance for PR

Alaska went to nonpartisan primary and IRV after 1994

State legislatures

no switch to PR to report

States' upper house

49 states have a state senate; 

Nebraska has a one-chamber (unicameral) system, though its members are still called senators

1821 to 1846, New York was divided into 8 districts, each of which elected four senators (using block voting presumably)

all use FPTP as far as I know, except Alaska went to IRV after 1994

==========

The 1790 Constitution of Pennsylvania specified multiple-member districts for the state Senate and required their boundaries to follow county lines.

from Wiki "Proportional Representation"

but today there are 250 Pennsylvania Senators, elected for four-year terms from single-member districts

the former rule about using county lines would have prevented gerrymandering.

NY State Senate

From 1777 to 1846, all of NY state's senatorial seats were filled in multi-seat districts.

(In the 1800s, it was said because SMDs are smaller, under use of SMDs not only were there fewer competent men to choose from, but there was also greater opportunity for less-able men to be elected.)

states' lower house

Alaska went to IRV after 1994

Maine uses IRV for both general elections and for primary elections (held separately by each party), excluding those for president.

Illinois went to Cumulative Voting in 1870

went to First Past The Post in 1970

=======

New Hampshire's floterial seats

New Hampshire has floterial seats where a bunch of districts get to elect additional seats. That isn't compensatory in a PR way. 

NH state courts overturned their use in the 2000s on grounds that the district maps were too complicated and produced disproportionate results.

then Legislators and voters amended the state constitution to bring them back, and it passed (by referendum?) by 70%.

As someone noted - "That shows that once something is ingrained, it might be well supported. At the same time it shows how hard it might be to introduce PR even by ballot initiative."

Several U.S. states --  Alaska, Idaho, New Hampshire, Tennessee and Texas -- have used floterial districts for state offices.

Only New Hampshire currently uses them.

NH constitution describes how floterial districts may be used to adjust for population that deviates from the norm. This is needed in a sense as districts are not drawn arbitrarily -- NH constitution says "In forming the districts, the boundaries of towns, wards, and unincorporated places shall be preserved and contiguous."

see https://www.opendemocracynh.org/about_nh_s_floterial_voting_districts

one source says Wyoming, which has a similar rural, low density population, also uses floterial districts.

============

Constitution of Oregon (1908) and still in place today

Section 16. Election by plurality; proportional representation. In all elections authorized by this constitution until otherwise provided by law, the person or persons receiving the highest number of votes shall be declared elected, but provision may be made by law for elections by equal proportional representation of all the voters for every office which is filled by the election of two or more persons whose official duties, rights and powers are equal and concurrent. Every qualified elector resident in his precinct and registered as may be required by law, may vote for one person under the title for each office. Provision may be made by law for the voter's direct or indirect expression of his first, second or additional choices among the candidates for any office. For an office which is filled by the election of one person it may be required by law that the person elected shall be the final choice of a majority of the electors voting for candidates for that office. These principles may be applied by law to nominations by political parties and organizations. [Constitution of 1859; Amendment proposed by initiative petition filed Jan. 29, 1908, and adopted by the people June 1, 1908]

but PR not in use despite the state Constitution

other notes:

Top-Two/Jungle Primaries: California and Washington use a nonpartisan blanket primary where all candidates appear on one ballot, and the top two finishers move to the general election.

Redistricting of state-assembly  districts

multi-member districts at state level

ten U.S. states have at least one state-level legislative chamber that includes members elected in multi-member districts. 

Many of them elect using the general ticket voting system so no proportionality is usually produced despite the use of MMDs.

as late as 1960, most states elected all or some of their lower-house members using MMDs, 

in 1960 three states elected all lower-house members through MM districts; 

35 of the 50 states elected some of the lower-house members through MM districts and some through SMD.

Now just ten states do (note: I have blurred distinction between lower house and upper house).

In 2026, four states use MMDs to elect all their state House members:

Arizona,

New Jersey,

South Dakota

Washington.

In 2026, six other states use MMDs to elect some of their state legislators:

Idaho

Maryland

New Hampshire uses MMDs that range in size from 2 to 11  to elect state legislators.

(2-, 3-, 4-, 6-, 8- and 11-seat districts. perhaps 5 or 7 and 9-seat districts as well)

(examples: Belknap districts 2, 5, 6, 7; Merrimack district 6) Also see its use of floterial districts, above.

North Dakota

Vermont

West Virginia.

see Ballotpedia for details:

https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_chambers_that_use_multi-member_districts

Pennsylvania used MMDs for long time

The Legislative Reapportionment Commission, following the 1970 Census, adopted a plan that largely eliminated multi-member districts in favor of single-member districts for the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.

1972 election used no MMDs I think

=====================================================================

City elections

Between 1915 and 1962, twenty-four U.S. cities used STV system for at least one election. In many cities, minority parties and other groups used STV to break up single-party monopolies on elective office.

One of the most famous cases is New York City, where a coalition of Republicans and others pursued the adoption of STV in 1936 as part of an effort to free the city from control by the Tammany Hall political machine. 

NYC's STV system, with an unusual use of uniform quota, was innovated by judge Samuel Seabury, a lost hero of the PR cause.

Cambridge, Massachusetts has used STV to elect its city councilors since 1945 or so

Peoria, Illinois has used Cumulative Voting for many years. 

San Francisco used preferential voting (Bucklin voting) in its city elections around 1920 and then switched to STV. (see Chester Collins Maxey, "Cleveland Election and the New Charter", The American Political Science Review, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Feb., 1922), pp. 83-86 (4 pages))

in 1996 The city of San Francisco considered STV in a referendum; but the city [voters?] voted for single-member wards and FPTP,

in 2002, San Fran adopted Instant-Runoff Voting for its single-member wards.

Cincinnati narrowly failed to restore STV for city council elections in citizen initiatives in 1988 and 1991.

Minneapolis adopted STV circa 2005?

Portland Oregon adopted STV circa 2022.

===================

Goal of PR:

The goal is that each party will takes its due share of seats, a party that takes majority of votes will take a majority of seats, each substantial group will get at least some representation, and a large proportion of votes used to elect the winners.

hope it is of interest as partial as it is,

=================================================

Alhambra Books 10115 81 Avenue, Edmonton

50,000 used books in stock

many listed on ABEbooks.com for those who can't make it into the store.

========================================================================