An explanation and description of the types of ballots (single ballot, open and closed lists) takes into consideration the following three variables:
- whether voters must make a categorical or ordinal choice;
- the structure of the ballot paper;
- the number of offices to be filled.
These three dimensions will be reviewed in turn.
Ordinal vs. Categorical Ballots
A categorical ballot is one where the voter makes a straight choice either for a candidate or for a party list. An ordinal ballot is one where the voter is required to indicate preferences among the various candidates or parties by numbering their respective names, in declining order (1,2,3...) (see Electoral System and Ballot Type Implications for the Count and Way of Voting).
Counting implications: Preferential ordinal ballots make ballot counting more complex. The chief rule is that only 'first preferences' i.e. the number of ballots where the name of a given candidate are marked with the figure '1', are normally to be counted on election night. Subsequent preferences are to be counted only if no candidate is found to have obtained a majority (more than 50%) of first preferences. In this case, the weakest candidate is eliminated and the second preferences expressed on his or her ballots are counted and transferred to other candidates. However, in order to provide the media and the public with a reliable guess as to where the second or subsequent preferences of the weakest candidates will go, Australia directs that those preferences be also counted on election night, whether they prove necessary or not in the end.
The Structure of the Ballot Paper
The simplest option is the so-called 'Australian ballot', which groups the names of all candidates for a single office on a single ballot paper, to be marked by the voter. Another option is the French 'ballot paper and envelope system' where there is one ballot paper for each candidate, voters collect each candidate's ballot and insert one in an envelope to be dropped into the ballot box, and dispose of all other unused ballots.
Counting implications: Australian ballots are easier to count, as they are simply taken out of the ballot box, unfolded and sorted. A supplementary advantage is that the results of the count are easier to check post facto. Once counting is completed, the ballot papers marked for each party or candidate are placed in distinct sealed envelopes and archived. If the results of the election are later challenged, the envelopes may be reopened before a judge and their contents counted again. Further, rejected ballot papers may be re-examined in determine whether they ought to have been rejected or not.
Under the ballot and envelope system, the first step is to count the unopened envelopes to determine how many votes were cast. Then each envelope can be opened, the ballot paper taken out and the name of the candidate or party on the ballot read aloud and recorded by attendants. From this moment, nothing distinguishes a ballot paper which has been duly cast any other, and the only evidence of how many votes were cast for each party or candidate is the tally sheet used by counting officers, and the final statement of the votes cast. Only the latter has any official value and is kept for recording purposes. Normally more than one copy of the statement is made.
If conflicting figures are found in the various copies of the statement for any voting station, there is no authoritative evidence as to what the right figures are, because the ballot papers are not kept. Even if the ballot papers are kept and put into sealed envelopes, nothing distinguishes a ballot paper actually cast for a candidate or party from any other ballot paper that was not actually cast. Only ballot papers and envelopes that were rejected are kept and annexed to the statement of votes. This system makes it difficult for judges to recount the ballot papers subsequently, or even to decide whether a ballot paper has been lawfully rejected. For example, if a vote has been rejected because the envelope was found to include no ballot, or because a ballot paper was inserted in the box without being put into an envelope first, or because the envelope included ballot papers for different candidates, the only evidence available, apart from suitable mentions on the minutes of proceedings of the counting station, is an empty envelope or isolated ballot papers.
Sometimes legislation provides a mix of both schemes. Voters can be required to insert the list of candidates sponsored by a single party into the envelope, but in addition, allow voters to mark the name of one or more candidates on that list. This kind of hybrid can be found notably in some proportional representation (PR) countries where preferential voting for some candidates is allowed (e.g., Latvia).
The Number of Offices to be Filled
In most countries, an election involves a single set of elective offices, e.g. Members of Parliament. This requires a single ballot paper.
It also happens that numerous offices are to be filled at the same time such as President, Congressman, Senator, State governor, State legislator, etc (e.g., Liberia). This raises numerous issues, both political and technical.
a. Straight ticket vs. Split ticket: One option is to oblige voters to give a single vote for a party, which is deemed to count for each of the candidates sponsored by that party for the various offices to be filled. For example, the Venezuelan ticket, whereby a single vote is valid for all the candidates sponsored by a party at the local, state and national level, is an extreme example of this. Another option is to allow voters to have a distinct vote for each office.
Counting implications: When voters are required to cast straight tickets, vote counting is simplified because all that needs to be done is to count the ballot papers cast for each party. When voters are granted a distinct vote for each office to be filled, which allows them to 'split their ticket', counting is much more complex. Separate tally sheets must be used for each office to be filled, which makes vote counting a lengthy operation.
In such cases, the use of mechanical or electronic voting machines may appear the only solution that ensures a quick determination of the winner(s).
b. A single multi-office ballot paper vs. numerous single-office ballot papers. The former option allows for both straight and split tickets. The latter is compatible only with split tickets.
Counting implications: Same as above. If numerous ballot papers, one for each office, are used, it is recommended that the ballot papers for each office be printed on paper of a distinctive colour to avoid confusion during the count, especially if all ballot papers, irrespective of the office to which they relate, are put into a single ballot box.
