One of The Split Ticketing Assignment Help

Split Ticketing Assignment Help

The process by which voters choose various parties for different offices in elections is known as ticket-splitting. To put it another way, in an election where multiple offices are contested on a single ballot, voters will vote for one party for one position and another party for another.

What is a ticket splitter?

Individual voters spread their votes across various parties during an election using a ticket splitter. When more than one office is up for election, this sort of voting takes place. It is regarded as a viable alternative to straight-ticket voting.

Explain split ticket voting

Ticket splitting can differ along with two significant aspects, starting with this broad description. 

1. The first dimension is one of orientation. Ticket splitting occurs horizontally or vertically, depending on institutional frameworks (Campbell and Miller, 1957). Only when many equivalent offices are contested is horizontal ticket-splitting possible. Vertical ticket-splitting, on the other hand, occurs when elections are held to fill positions at various levels of Government. 
2. The second dimension focuses on timing, specifically how ticket-splitting is affected by concurrent versus non-concurrent elections. 

The papers in this collection are arranged in Table 1 along these two axes. 

Split ticket examples

1. For example, in a presidential election year, voters in Ohio will have to choose between President, U.S. Senator, U.S.Representative, and a slew of local contests on a single ballot. The voter can split the ticket via voting for Republicans in the Presidential Election, Democrats in the Senate, and the Republicans in the House. This would be a two-party vote.
2. In recent Australian federal elections, a House of Representatives election and a half-Senate election have usually been held on the same day. Except for Queensland and Tasmania, most states have simultaneous elections for both houses of parliament. A voter who provides their first preference to the Liberal Party on a House of Representatives paper ballot and the One Nation Party in the Senate is an example of split-ticket voting in Australia.
3. The Additional Member System is employed in the United Kingdom for the devolved assemblies of Scotland and Wales and the London Assembly. It is thought to enhance the chance of split-ticket voting. Each voter casts two votes: one for a candidate running in their district and another for a party list running across a larger region. A single representative is elected in each constituency using the traditional First-Past-The-Post method. 

Ticket splitting refers to:

Just as our ticket-splitting hypotheses should aim for generalizability, they can and should be modelled as part of a bigger theory of voter choice, one that gives us a baseline model of voting in each of the elections under consideration. Researchers should be as clear as possible about which model they are using to guide their research paper.

One of the theories that have been thoroughly explored in this Symposium is 'strategic balance' (Fiorina, 1996; Kedar, 2005). A model like this is generated from a simple spatial proximity model in which voters choose policies closest to their ideal spots (Downs, 1957).

The balancing model includes several assumptions regarding voter intelligence, including the idea that voters can reason about how institutions interact to achieve policy results. It may be natural to use a balancing paradigm when the policy is a convex mixture of policy inputs from two institutions.

If the authorities of the two institutions are separated along jurisdictional boundaries, voter motivation should be adjusted accordingly.

Extensions of the theory include policy discounting (Lacy and Paolino, 1998) and coordination (Mebane, 2000), and hence have broader implications for our understanding of voter behaviour. We must also recognise, as Brunell and Grofman's contribution in this Symposium shows, that the basic spatial model can explain ticket-splitting without necessitating strategic balancing (Grofman et al., 2000).

What are states with a split ticketing system?

For more than three decades, split party control of the executive and legislative branches has been a distinguishing feature of American national politics, the longest period of frequent divided Government in the country's history.

Even though voters failed to produce a split federal government in the 2000 elections, the party defection of a single U.S.U.S. senator (former Republican James Jeffords of Vermont) resulted in the formation of another divided national government.

Furthermore, because of the highly consolidated competitive balance between the two major parties, ticket splitters are sometimes used to determine which party controls each branch of Government. 

These characteristics of American politics have sparked much speculation regarding the origins of split-ticket voting.

• The status of a divided government and unusually high percentages of split-ticket voting have been frequently highlighted in recent years as evidence of an electorate that has moved beyond party labels (Wattenberg 1998).
• Another argument proposes that some voters strategically split their ballots to form a divided government with moderate policies (Fiorina 1996; Alesina and Rosenthal 1995).
• However, the elections of 2000 and 2002 barely resulted in a unified national government, with ticket-splitting at its lowest level in over thirty years.

What is the relevance of split ticketing?

Split-ticket voting, while uncommon, has the potential to be employed as a tactical voting method. A voter favours candidate A but does not believe that candidate A can win the electoral votes for candidate B (who may be from a different political party than candidate A) because candidate B is better than more competitive candidates C, D, etc.

Split-ticket voting is also possible in elections that use different voting systems. A voter who chooses a candidate from a minority party for an office determined by a proportional representation election system and a candidate from a larger party for an office determined by a first past the post-election system is an example.

Before finishing,

I hope that after going through the article, you must know what split-ticket voting and its importance is. So now, if you are getting any assignment help, you can easily write an essay about it. However, if you are still facing any confusion, contact us via chat or call, and we are always ready to help you.

References:

Alesina, A., Rosenthal, H., 1995. Partisan Politics, Divided Government, and the Economy. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Campbell, A., Miller, W.E., 1957. The motivational basis of straight and split-ticket voting. American Political Science Review 51, 293–312.

Downs, A., 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper, New York

Fiorina, M.P., 1996. Divided Government, seconded. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.

Grofman, B., Koetzle, W., McDonald, M., Brunell, T.L., 2000. A new look at split-ticket outcomes for House and president: The comparative midpoints model. Journal of Politics 62, 35–50.

Kedar, O., 2005. When moderate voters prefer extreme parties: Policy balancing in parliamentary elections. American Political Science Review 99, 185–199.

Lacy, D., Paolino, P., 1998. Downsian voting and the separation of powers. American Journal of Political Science 24, 1180–1199.

Mebane Jr., W.R., 2000. Coordination, moderation, and institutional balancing in American presidential and House elections. American Political Science Review 94, 37–57.