Negative voting, which allows voters to vote against candidates, could improve democracies according to research. It gives voters the basic right to say "no" and may increase voter participation. Negative voting could also reduce extremism by punishing extreme rhetoric and make election results better reflect the views of more people. Research in Taiwan found negative voting decreased undecided voters and increased the percentage of decided voters. It also showed some candidates saw their support drop once negative votes were included.

1. Negative Vote
can improve all democracies
Mar. 21, 2016
Centre for Comparative and Public Law

2. Current Ballot

3. What is Negative Vote?
• Negative Vote is a vote against a candidate.
• Winner is the person who gets higher net positive votes

4. New Ballot
For
Against
For
Against

5. Why would Negative Vote improve democracy?
1. The right to say “nay” should be a basic right
Suppose there is only one candidate…

7. Sept. 2014 election in Taiwan
• “38 ％of village wardens, or 2970 persons ran unopposed
• Media report: “4-time winner Hou, suspected of forcing an
opponent Ms. Yeh to withdraw from competition by
claiming her butcher stall space is occupied illegally”
Allow only “yea” in elections is half democracy

8. Why would Negative Vote improve democracy?
2.Voter participation will increase
• Voters who do not like any candidate will come out to vote
• Some voters may feel it is easier to discern whom he
dislikes than whom he likes
• The election result will more clearly reflect more people’s
views
• Victor sees “nay” votes, can no longer arrogantly proclaim
“I have majority popular support”

9. Supporting Rates for 2016 Presidential Election
-Before Prompting Negative Vote
5.2
21.5
7.6
7.8
42.1
15.9
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
DK / RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Soong, James C.Y. / Hsu, Hsing0ying
Tsai, Ing-wen / Chen, Chien-jen
Chu, Li-luan / Wang, Ju-hsuan
Total
decided
voters
65.7%

10. Supporting Rates for 2016 Presidential Election
-Prompted and Assuming Negative Vote Is Adopted
-4.2
-6.2
-15.9
5
18.2
5.7
5.2
28.1
11.6
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
DK / RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Soong, James C.Y. / Hsu, Hsing0ying
Tsai, Ing-wen / Chen, Chien-jen
Chu, Li-luan / Wang, Ju-hsuan
Negative Rates Supporting Rates
Total
decided
voters
71.1%

11. Supporting Rates for 2016 Presidential Election –
With and Without Negative Vote
5.0%
[VALUE]
5.7%
1.0%
21.9%
-4.3%
5.2%
21.5%
7.6%
7.8%
42.1%
15.9%
DK / RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Soong, James C.Y. / Hsu, Hsin-ying
Tsai, Ing-wen / Chen, Chien-jen
Chu, Li-luan / Wang, Ju-hsuan
Without Negative Vote (65.7% are decided) With Negative Vote (71.1% are decided)
= 11.6% supporting -15.9% negative
= 28.1% supporting - 6.2% negative
= 5.2% supporting - 4.2% negative
Gallup Market Research Corp., Taiwan (GMRC) Q1. vs Q4.
% of Will not vote / Undecided /
DK/RF has reduced by 5.4%
after Negative Vote introduced

12. Why would Negative Vote improve all democracies?
3. Reduce extremism
Because each person has only one vote, basic party supporters will not
change. The middle-electorate are more likely to cast negative votes and
they will vote against extremists
• Extreme rhetoric will be reduced
• Society becomes more harmonious internally
• Less likely to war against its neighbors
Improve prospect for world peace

13. U.S. Presidential Election
Gallup poll shows D. Trump with 60% unfavorable rating, H. Clinton 52%
unfavorable

14. Israel

15. Summary: why Negative Vote
1. Basic right to say “NAY”
2. Increase voter participation
3. Reduce extremism, improve harmony and world peace

16. Two-candidate scenario
A B
12 22 100Net
34 (50.7%) 33 (49.3%) 67
-22 -11 -33

17. Three-candidate scenario
A B C
8 12 14 34Net
30 22 15 67
-22 -10 -1 -33

18. Supporting Rates of 2016 Legislator Election in Hsinchu City –
Before Prompting Negative Vote
5.4%
24.9%
7.1%
0.2%
14.5%
0.7%
0.1%
1.0%
22.4%
23.6%
DK / RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Wei, Dennis
Chiu, Handy
Wu, Shumin
Wang, Jung-Der
Ou, Charles
Ker, Chien-ming
Cheng, Chenchin
Gallup Market Research Corp., Taiwan (GMRC) Q1.
Total
decided
voters
62.5%

19. Supporting Rates of 2016 Legislator Election in Hsinchu City –
Prompted and Assuming Negative Vote Is Adopted
-0.2%
-1.3%
-0.1%
-0.1%
-0.3%
-9.9%
-4.8%
7.7%
22.6%
7.2%
10.1%
0.5%
0.1%
0.3%
0.7%
17.8%
16.4%
DK / RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Wei, Dennis
Chiu, Handy
Wu, Shumin
Wang, Jung-Der
Zheng, Yaozheng
Ou, Charles
Ker, Chien-ming
Cheng, Chenchin
Negative Rates Supporting Rates
Gallup Market Research Corp., Taiwan (GMRC) Q3.
Total
decided
voters
62.5%

20. Supporting Rates of 2016 Legislator Election in Hsinchu City –
With and Without Negative Vote
7.70%
22.60%
7.20%
-0.20%
8.80%
0.50%
-0.04%
0.20%
0.40%
7.90%
11.50%
5.40%
24.90%
7.10%
0.20%
14.50%
0.70%
0.10%
0%
1%
22.40%
23.60%
DK / RF
Undecided
Will not Vote
Wei, Dennis
Chiu, Handy
Wu, Shumin
Wang, Jung-Der
Zheng, Yaozheng
Ou, Charles
Ker, Chien-ming
Chen, Chenchin
Without Negative Vote (62.5% are decided) With Negative Vote (62.5% are decided)
Gallup Market Research Corp., Taiwan (GMRC) Q1. vs Q3.
= 16.4% supporting – 4.8% negative
= 17.8% supporting – 9.9% negative

21. Hsin Chu City Legislative Seat Election Result
Final What if?
36,309 11.2% -1.3% 9.9%Chiu
90,642 27.9% -9.9% 18.0%Ker
79,951 24.6% -4.8% 19.8%Cheng
Total voters: 324,395
Effective Votes: 219, 311 67.6% (Gallup poll 62.5%, +6.1%)

22. Did the wrong person get elected?

23. 2016 Supporting Rates of Party Vote
- Before Prompting Negative Vote
5.9
21.8
6.1
0.1
0.2
2.5
0.4
1.4
0.5
2.4
0.7
5.6
33.7
18.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
DK/RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Tree Party
Faith and Hope League
New Power Party
MKT
Green Party / Social Democratic party
Non-Partisan Solidarity Union
TSU
NP
PFP
DPP
KMT
Total
decided
voters
66.2%

24. 2016 Political Party support rate
– with negative vote
-0.4
-0.4
-0.2
-2
-5.8
-17.3
6.4
18.3
5.8
0.1
0.1
1.5
0.5
0.6
0.3
0.9
0.2
3.3
22.6
13.5
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
DK/RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Tree Party
Faith and Hope League
New Power Party
MKT
Green Party / Social Democratic party
Non-Partisan Solidarity Union
TSU
NP
PFP
DPP
KMT
Negative Rates Supporting Rates
Total
decided
voters
69.5%

25. 2016 Supporting Rates of Party Vote
- With and Without Negative Vote
6.4
18.3
5.8
0.1
0.1
1.5
0.1
0.6
0.3
0.5
0.01
1.3
16.7
-3.8
5.9
21.8
6.1
0.1
0.2
2.5
0.4
1.4
0.5
2.4
0.7
5.6
33.7
18.8
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
DK/RF
Undecided
Will not vote
Tree Party
Faith and Hope League
New Power Party
MKT
Green Party/Social Democratic party
Non-Partisan Solidarity Union
TSU
NP
PFP
DPP
KMT
current voting system supporting rate (%)
negative vote supporting rate (%)
= 13.5% supporting – 17.3% negative
= 22.6% supporting – 5.8% negative
= 3.3% supporting – 2.0% negative
% of Will not vote /
Undecided / DK/RF has
reduced by 3.3% after
Negative Vote
Introduced

26. How to change the laws?
1. Legislative Yuan?
2. Plebiscite

27. Plebiscite thresholds
1. Phase 1: 100K petitions (0.5% of the electorate in the last
Presidential election)
2. Phase 2: 1 million petitions (5% of the electorate in the
last Presidential election, 6 months deadline)
3. Participation of half of current electorate (9,4m)
4. Over half approve (4,7m)

28. Agreement with “Amending the Law for Negatie Vote”
23.1
11.9
17.8 14.3
22.2
16.8
13.6
17.2
13.9 15.9
8.6 17.8
20.4
22.1 22 21.7 21.7 13.7
24.8
28.7 23.9 29.3 30.4
44.6
18 20.1 22.5 18.7 17
7.1
Total 30 to 39 years
old
High school College /
University
Central East
Agree very much
Somewhate agree
Somewhat disagree
Disagree very much
DK/RF
42.8
34.0
48.8
46.4
48.0 47.4 51.7
39.3
35.8
37.6
30.4
31.5

29. The road ahead:
JFK : "We choose to go the Moon not
because it is easy but because it is hard"

30. A Thought for Hong Kong
• …….unpopularity climbs to more than 170,000. What this means is
CY Leung is more than 100-times unpopular than US presidential
candidate Donald Trump
• http://www.financetwitter.com/2016/02/facebook-angry-emoji-cy-leung-gets-170000-najib-razak-most-hated-in-asean.html

32. A Thought for Hong Kong
Could Negative Vote offer an interim solution that satisfies both
Beijing’s desire to control the nomination process and
Hong Kong’s popular demand for universal suffrage?

33. Example in China
• April 1999 Shangxi Province Zhou Li Village election, the ballot had
three choices for each candidate：Agree、Basically Agree, and
Disagree
• “Agree and Basically Agree” must exceed 50%

34. Thank you

35. Q & A

36. Q & A
Q: Has this been tried in other countries? Why don’t we wait until the
more advanced democracies try it first?
A: Why should Taiwan not lead?

37. Q & A
Q: Has this been tried in other countries? Why don’t we wait until the
more advanced democracies try it first?
A: Why should Hong Kong not lead?

38. Q: How to avoid having a winner with very few gross positive vote?
A: Set minimum threshold? 10%?
Taiwan election laws already have many thresholds in the
nomination process
Q & A

39. Q & A
Q: What if no one gets net positive votes?
A: Election must be re-held. Rejected candidates may not participate again.
Q: Isn’t that costly to the society ?
A1: Which is more costly, electing the wrong person or re-holding an
election?
A2: The probability of this event is very low anyway

40. Q & A
Q: This will increase negative campaign
A: Just the opposite. The middle electorate will punish those who
deploy smear tactics.

41. Q & A
Q: The smaller parties may be squeezed out
A: Any political party must consider whether its nominee will attract
the negative votes from the middle electorate, whether it is a major
party or a small party.

42. Q & A
Q: Winner should be decided by absolute majority (over 50%)
A: Any election that does not allow people to say “nay”, even if the
winner gets over 50%, it is still a false majority.
If Negative Vote is allowed, the probability of any one getting over
50% is very low. A plurality is sufficient , the result will accurately
reflect more people choice.

43. The Impact on Willingness to Vote
after Negative Vote Introduced
Increase
Willingness
28.1%
No difference
56.1%
Decrease
willingness
5.3%
DK/RF
10.1%
20 – 29 year-old: 36.9%
30 – 39 year-old: 36.1%
College / university: 32.8%
Master +: 30.4%

44. References
1. Boehm, G.A.W. (1976): One fervent vote against Wintergreen. Mimeograph.
2. Brams, S.J. (1977): When is it advantageous to cast a negative vote? In: Mathematical Economics and Game Theory:
Essays in Honor of Oscar Morgenstern (R. Henn, O. Moeschlin, eds.). Springer, Berlin, pp. 564–572.
3. Felsenthal, D.S. (1989): On combining approval with disapproval voting. Behavioral Science 34, 56–70.
4. Daniel Ferguson & Theodore Lowi (2001): Reforming American Electoral Politics: Let’s Take“No” for an Answer, 34 PS:
Pol. Sci. & Pol. 277, 277
5. George C. Leef (October 29, 2004) A Modest Proposal – Let’s Allow Negative Voting http://fff.org/explore-
freedom/article/modest-proposal-lets-negative-voting/
6. Jess Brewer, http://www.researchgate.net/post/Has_anyone_ever_tried_Negative_Votes
7. Michael Kang(2010): Voting as veto, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 108, No. 7
8. Jos´e Carlos R. Alcantud and Annick Laruelle: To approve or not to approve: this is not the only question. Universidad
de Salamanca, Spain, University of the Basque Country. (October 2012) https://mpra.ub.uni-
muenchen.de/41885/1/MPRA_paper_41885.pdf