In PR, Pick As Many Candidates As You Like

What if you like a lot of different candidates in an election, and just can't make up your mind which one to vote for? Come to Cambridge, where you can vote for as many as you like.

City officials in Cambridge are elected according to the Hare system of proportional representation (PR). Cambridge citizens vote for as many of the 22 candidates as they want, assigning a 1 vote to their first choice candidate, 2 to their second choice, and on down the line.

Proponents of the system say that it gives representation to minority viewpoints, and prevents domination of the scene by one party. It can, however, cause difficulties for candidates campaigning.

Clearly, the primary goal of a political hopeful is getting as many 1 votes as possible, since the candidate is automatically elected when he or she reaches quota (10 percent of the total vote plus one).

But candidates do not often reach this quota in the first round. Although four candidates in the last election did get enough votes to be elected in the first round, in 1981 only one was so lucky.

After the distribution of 1 votes, candidates' surplus votes are distributed to the second choice on particular ballots. For example, if Alice Wolf's quota is 3000 votes, and she receives 3500, 500 random ballots are pulled from her stack. Then, each ballot is placed in the pile of its 2 candidate.

To tabulate the election results, officials work from the bottom up. The candidates with the fewest 1's are immediately declared ineligible, and their ballots are redistributed to second choice candidates. If the second choice has already been elected or eliminated, the ballot is passed on to the third choice candidate, and so on.

This process continues until nine candidates are selected for city council and six for the school committee (The seventh school committee member is the mayor). The transfer of votes theoretically goes down the list of all of the candidates, but it usually stops somewhere around 5 or 6.

Election officials take a long time to come up with results, often spending a week or more counting ballots in the Longfellow School. Meanwhile, candidates can do nothing but wait and try their best to predict the outcome.

Because of the elimination system, the candidates must gather as many 1 votes as they possibly can. To do this, campaigning candidates focus on identifying individuals who will support their stance on central issues and form a solid constituency.

"To be elected in the PR system, you have to have a geographical base and some city-wide appeal," said Clifford E. Truesdell, vice-chairman of the Democratic City Committee (DCC).

First-time candidates who do not have a specific constituency often have a hard time breaking into the system, said Francis L. Budryk, who is running for city council.

"The PR system lets people stay in office perpetually," said Budryk.

Candidates who have not established a band of loyal followers can try to increase their visibility by becoming associated with a slate, a coalition of candidates with similar stands on a variety of issues. Members of slates, such as the liberal Cambridge Civic Association (CCA), urge voters to consider other members of the slate for choices 2 through 5.

Cambridge politicos have varied ideas on whether or not a slate affiliation helps or hurts a candidate. Lesser known slate candidates who do not make quota in the first round pull transfer votes from their more experienced associates.

"You have to run on a slate and be allied with a philosophical view in order to win," said Marvin C. Foster, former DCC chairman and longtime Cambridge resident.

But sometimes a slate association can backfire on a candidate. Foster noted the case of Barbara Ackerman, whose supporters were so sure she would win that they gave their 1 votes to other slate members, and Ackerman was not elected.

"It's like the old saying goes," said Foster. "Those that live by the slate, die by the slate."

The CCA presently holds four of the nine council seats. The conservative Independents hold another four, and the last belongs to Alfred E. Vellucci, an Independent who often votes with the CCA on housing and social issues.

A new slate, Coalition '85, was formed last January in opposition to the CCA's stand on strong rent control in Cambridge.

Since a candidate only needs 10 percent of the vote to win a seat, the PR system works best for a candidate like anti rent control advocate William J. Walsh, who is running on a protest issue and is backed in part by a specific constituency, Cambridge condo-owners.

The condo-owners are gradually emerging as a new political force, predicted Cambridge pols, but the precarious balance between the CCA and the Independents which has existed for 10 years will likely be maintained.

"The PR system makes for a moderately progressive, stable government," said Truesdell. "Violent alternation in the council isn't in anybody's interest."