Next the counting of votes begins. First of all the first choices are counted. When a candidate has secured the required quota of first choice, he is declared elected. The surplus votes cast in his name are then transferred to the candidates of the second choice, till he secured the requisite quota of votes and so on. In case no candidate completes the quota, then the votes of those candidates who secured the lowest number of votes are transferred, to the other, according to the preferences expressed on the ballot-papers till their quota is complete. Thus as many candidates are declared successful as there are seats to be filled. In this way, every minority gets representation according to its voting strength, provided it is more then the required quota of votes.
Its Defects.
The single transferable vote system has some obvious defects. It is complicated and difficult to be understood by ordinary voters. It encourages party intrigues and combinations and such tricks as “bullet voting.” that is, voting for only one candidate in order to receive votes from other parties while giving none. It, therefore, encourages differences and cleavages among ‘parties and interests. Lastly, it may happen sometimes that the candidate with first choices may fail to secure the quota while those of the second and third choices may be declared successful. How can we say that the second, third or later choices are the real preferences of the voters?
The List System.
It is another variation of the proportional representation. It is used in several European countries, such as Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, etc. It is also based on the multiple member constituency system. Each political party puts a list of as many candidates as the number of the seats to be filled from a constituency. Every voter has one vote, which he exists not for one candidate but for the list of the party of his choice. Before the votes are counted, a quota is determined by dividing the number of votes cast by the number of seats to be filled from a constituency. Then the total number of votes secured by each party is divided by the quota, which gives the number of candidates of the party. Suppose 6,000 votes are cast in a four- member constituency. The electoral quota is 1,501 votes. Now suppose there are three parties, viz., nationalists, socialists and conservatives The nationalists have secured 3,400 votes, the socialist party secured 2,100 and the conservative party 500 votes. So the nationalist party will get two seats, the socialist party one seat, while the conservative party none, for its votes polled are less then the quota of 1,501 votes.
Its merits and defects.
The List System is exceedingly simple. The wastage of votes is far lesser than in the case of the Hare System. As no preferences are shown, it is easily intelligible to the voters. But it places excessive power in the hands of the party organisation and denies to the voters the privilege of selecting individual candidates. Nevertheless, the List System is far more popular than the Hare or the single transferable vote system.