IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/v38y2009i2p383-418.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Less Can Be More: Conflicting Ballot Proposals and the Highest Vote Rule

Author

Listed:
  • Michael D. Gilbert
  • Joshua M. Levine

Abstract

This paper examines conflicting ballot proposals-two or more measures that run contrary to one another and that citizens vote on in the same election. Sometimes a majority votes in favor of more than one conflicting proposal, generating a legal impasse that courts resolve by applying the "highest vote rule." The rule upholds the proposal that received the greatest number of affirmative votes and invalidates all competing proposals, even though they also garnered majority support. Using spatial models, we show that the proposal receiving the most votes is not systematically closest to the median voter's ideal point, and consequently the rule can generate antimajoritarian outcomes. We discuss the implications of our finding, analyze and reject existing alternatives to the highest vote rule, and propose an original solution to the problem. (c) 2009 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael D. Gilbert & Joshua M. Levine, 2009. "Less Can Be More: Conflicting Ballot Proposals and the Highest Vote Rule," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 383-418, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:38:y:2009:i:2:p:383-418
    DOI: 10.1086/597787
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/597787
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/597787?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey A. Dubin & D. Roderick Kiewiet & Charles Noussair, 1992. "Voting On Growth Control Measures: Preferences And Strategies," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 191-213, July.
    2. Joseph Kadane, 1972. "On division of the question," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 47-54, September.
    3. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    4. Lupia, Arthur, 1994. "Shortcuts Versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 63-76, March.
    5. Cooter, Robert D. & Gilbert, Michael D., 2006. "Chaos, Direct Democracy and the Single Subject Rule," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt9xm920bv, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alan Blinder & Alan Krueger, 2004. "What Does the Public Know about Economic Policy, and How Does It Know It?," Working Papers 875, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    2. Author-Name: Alan S. Blinder & Alan B. Krueger, 2004. "What Does the Public Know about Economic Policy, and How Does It Know It?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 35(1), pages 327-397.
    3. Kumlin, Staffan, 2000. "Ideology-driven public opinion formation in Europe: The case of third sector attitudes in Sweden," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions and Social Change FS III 00-202, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Hessami, Zohal & Resnjanskij, Sven, 2019. "Complex ballot propositions, individual voting behavior, and status quo bias," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 82-101.
    5. Enriqueta Aragonès & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2017. "Imperfectly Informed Voters And Strategic Extremism," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 58(2), pages 439-471, May.
    6. Kenneth Koford, 1982. "Centralized vote-trading," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 245-268, January.
    7. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, "undated". "The Role of Direct Democracy and Federalism in Local Power," IEW - Working Papers 209, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    8. Danny Hayes & Seth C. McKee, 2009. "The Participatory Effects of Redistricting," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 1006-1023, October.
    9. Ahlquist, John S. & Ichino, Nahomi & Wittenberg, Jason & Ziblatt, Daniel, 2018. "How do voters perceive changes to the rules of the game? Evidence from the 2014 Hungarian elections," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 906-919.
    10. Gregory Chow & Yan Shen, 2004. "Money, Price Level and Output in the Chinese Macro Economy," Working Papers 104, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    11. Rogers, Todd & Nickerson, David W., 2013. "Can Inaccurate Beliefs about Incumbents be Changed? And Can Reframing Change Votes?," Working Paper Series rwp13-018, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Frank, Bjorn & Pitlik, Hans & Wirth, Steffen, 2004. "Expert opinion leaders' impact on voter turnout: the case of the Internet Chess Match Kasparov vs. World," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 619-635, September.
    13. Thomas Schwartz, 2011. "One-dimensionality and stability in legislative voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 197-214, July.
    14. Elisabeth R. Gerber & Justin H. Phillips, 2004. "Direct Democracy and Land Use Policy: Exchanging Public Goods for Development Rights," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(2), pages 463-479, February.
    15. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2020. "Do party positions affect the public's policy preferences? Experimental evidence on support for family policies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 523-543.
    16. Jonathan Bendor & Sunil Kumar & David A. Siegel, 2010. "Adaptively Rational Retrospective Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(1), pages 26-63, January.
    17. Kenneth Koford, 1982. "Why so much stability? An optimistic view of the possibility of rational legislative decisionmaking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, March.
    18. Patrick Sturgis, 2003. "Knowledge and Collective Preferences," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 31(4), pages 453-485, May.
    19. Brad R. Taylor, 2020. "The psychological foundations of rational ignorance: biased heuristics and decision costs," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 70-88, March.
    20. repec:zbw:rwirep:0336 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Katjana Gattermann & Claes De Vreese & Wouter van der Brug, 2016. "Evaluations of the Spitzenkandidaten: The Role of Information and News Exposure in Citizens’ Preference Formation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 37-54.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:38:y:2009:i:2:p:383-418. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.