I’ve noticed that people have used the phrase “one person, one vote” to mean different things. This can lead to confusing situations, such as when Equal Vote references the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation but goes on to interpret it as requiring Frohnmayer balance. Because of this, I think it would be useful to identify the different levels of “one person, one vote” that an electoral system can meet. Here’s what I’ve come up with:
Level 1: each voter gets one vote/ballot
This is the most literal interpretation, and it’s passed by pretty much every serious option. I believe quadratic voting would be a notable exception, though.
Level 2: each vote/ballot has the same weight
This is the interpretation that the U.S. Supreme Court holds states to. It’s passed by every proportional method and every single-winner method using equally-sized districts. It’s failed by single-winner methods that use unequally-sized districts and the Electoral College.
Level 3: Frohnmayer balance/Equality Criterion
This is the interpretation pushed by Equal Vote. It’s passed by approval, score, and STAR. It’s failed by plurality, RCV, and 3-2-1. (Do any proportional methods pass this?)
Does this structuring of “one person, one vote” interpretations make sense? Do you see any mistakes regarding which methods pass which interpretations? Any other suggestions or feedback?