Importance in 'Mark Choice' Voting
In systems where voters have to mark their choice of preferred candidate or party on a ballot, determining the order in which accepted candidates, parties or groups appear on the ballot (either for ballot papers or machine or electronic systems) is the link between the nominations process and final election materials design and the voting and vote counting systems set up.
As candidate or party position on the ballot may affect voting behaviour (there are perceptions that some voters merely follow the order on the ballot in marking their vote), it is critical that legislation and regulations determining the method by which candidate/party order on the ballot is determined is equitable and that procedures are applied transparently by election administrators. Basic methods for creating the order on the ballot include:
- some form of alphabetical listing
- random draw
- rotating ballot positions
Alphabetical Order
Alphabetically-based ballot orders raise equity questions, as they may be susceptible to manipulation, through name-based choice of candidates or taking alphabetical considerations into account when naming parties or groups. Safeguards are required both internally within the election processes of nomination and party registration and, perhaps, externally in relation to persons changing their names.
However, such methods do provide a simple, easily verifiable method for determining order on the ballot, with transparency being simply achieved through publication by the electoral administration of the list of accepted candidates, parties, or groups in the required alphabetical order.
Random Allocation of Order
A truly random draw for positions on the ballot will prevent any name bias in ballot order. For equity benefits of a random draw to be realised, it is critical that election administrations conduct the draw in the presence of candidates or parties participating in the election, and it is accessible to the public. This may delay the determination of ballot order. In devising the procedures for random draws, the process must be kept obviously transparent. Basic requirements to be implemented by the electoral administration would include:
- draw to be made by persons, preferably electoral administration staff, independent of any political participants in the election;
- equipment used to be available for public inspection prior to and after the draw and constantly visible during the draw;
- equipment used to be of a durable nature (e.g., paper candidate name slips are not advisable; equal size and weight balls or tiles should be used);
- formal recording of draw results to be witnessed by candidate or party representatives present;
- additional integrity measures should be considered, such as a double randomisation process (a draw for each party or candidate's number and a second draw of these numbers for ballot position for each party or candidate).
For examples of control sheets for double randomisation draws, see Draw for Ballot Paper Order (candidates), Australia (individual candidate constituency) and Draw for Ballot Paper Order (party lists) - Australia (list election).
The use of existing apparatus of known integrity maintained by lottery or similar organisations may minimise equipment costs.
Rotating Positions on Ballot
Using rotating ballot positions negates any positioning advantage, and its implementation would depend on whether the measured impact on election equity outweighs administrative disadvantages. For inexperienced voters it may be confusing. For administration of voting operations it makes ballot counts more complex and has significant cost disadvantages in ballot materials printing and collation, ballot systems design, and, to some extent, voter education and election staffing. Appropriate transparency mechanisms are also more difficult and costly to implement; verifiable processes to ensure that equal numbers of each rotation's ballot papers, or machine or computer-generated ballot forms are available in each voting station must be maintained and available for public inspection.
Public Information and Data Transfer
Following the determination, the order on the ballot should immediately be made publicly available. The determination and publicising of the order should be made with the shortest possible delay after the closing time for nominations, both to counter any perceptions of manipulation of the order, or acceptance of late nominations, and to allow early finalisation of voting material and systems information at a time-critical stage in the election process.
It is vital that accuracy be maintained in transferring the candidate and party order on the ballot to voting materials (see Production of Ballots). Similar accuracy must be maintained in transferring the same candidate/party sequence to forms and materials used to assist in and record vote counts, to reduce the possibility of error in transferring data. This obviously will not be possible where the order on the ballot is rotated; particular care needs to be taken in devising vote tallying procedures and in training vote counting staff under such systems.
