| A jointPolitics andEconomics series |
| Social choice andelectoral systems |
|---|
 |
By results of combination By mechanism of combination By ballot type |
 Mathematics portal |
Thegeneral ticket orparty block voting (PBV),[1] is a type ofblock voting in which voters opt for a party or a team of candidates, and the highest-polling party/team becomes the winner and receives 100% of the seats for thismulti-member district. The party block voting is usually applied with more than one multi-member district to prevent one team winning all seats. This system has awinner-take-all nature similar tofirst-past-the-post voting forsingle-member districts, which is vulnerable togerrymandering andmajority reversals.
A related system is themajority bonus system, where a block of seats is awarded according to the winner ofparty-list proportional representation.
From 1941 up to 1949 elections, the Philippines elected its officials under this system, then known asblock voting. A voter can write the name of the party on the ballot and have all of that voter's votes allocated for that party's candidates, from president to local officials; there is still an option for a voter tosplit one's ticket down ballot and not write the name of the party. This led to landslides for theNacionalista Party in1941, for theLiberal Party in1949. The law was amended in time for the 1951 election, having voters to vote for each office separately.[2]
In Singapore, the general ticket system, locally known as theparty block vote, elects by far most members of theParliament of Singapore frommulti-member districts known asgroup representation constituencies (GRCs), on aplurality basis. This operates in parallel to elections fromsingle-member district andnominations. It is moderated by the inclusion of at least one person of a different race than the others in any "team" (which is not necessarily a party team) which is selected by voters.[citation needed]
| This article is part ofa series on the |
| United States House of Representatives |
|---|
 |
| History of the House |
| Members |
| Congressional districts |
| Politics and procedure |
| Places |
 United States portal |
Ticket voting is used to elect electors for theElectoral College forpresidential elections, except for some of the electors in Maine and Nebraska who are elected byfirst-past-the-post in districts covering just part of each state. Under ticket voting, votes for any non-overall winning party's candidates do not receive any representation by elected members.
The following countries use party block voting incoexistence with other systems in different districts.[citation needed]
| Country | Legislative body | Latest election (year) | (Seats per constituency) | Electoral system | Total seats | Share of seats elected by PBV | Constituencies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Côte d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) | National Assembly | 2021 | First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member districts andparty block voting (PBV) in multi-member districts | 255 | electoral districts | |||
 Egypt | House of Representatives | 2020 | 1 (local districts), 42-100 (list districts) | Two-round system (TRS) andparty block voting (PBV/General ticket) | 59 | electoral districts | ||
 Singapore | Parliament | 2025 | 1 (single-member districts), 4 to 5 (multi-member districts) | First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member districts andparty block voting (PBV) in multi-member districts | 108 (97 directly elected) | |||
 United States | Electoral College | 2020 | 1-54 | The electors of theElectoral College (who have opportunity to elect thePresident of the United States) are elected bygeneral ticket in 48 states based on state-wide party vote tallies. Nebraska and Maine use the general ticket method for 2 statewide electors each, with the other electors chosen byfirst-past-the-post in single-member congressional districts. | 538 | All states except Maine and Nebraska, where congressional districts are also used as constituencies | ||
Countries using party block votingin parallel withproportional representation.[citation needed]
| Country | Legislative body | Latest election (year) | (Seats per constituency) | Electoral system | Total seats | Share of seats elected by PBV | Constituencies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Andorra | General Council | 2019 | 2 (local districts) / 14 (nationwide constituency) | Parallel voting /superposition (MMM): Party block voting (PBV) locally +list PR nationwide | 28 | 50% | 7 parishes, 1 nationwide constituency | |
 Cameroon | National Assembly | 2020 | 1-7 | Coexistence+conditional supermixed/hybrid: First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member constituencies, party with over 50% of vote gets all seats in multi-member constituencies (party block voting), otherwise highest party gets half, rest distributed bylargest remainder (Hare quota) | 180 | (50%/100%) | electoral districts | |
 Chad | National Assembly | 2011 | ?[citation needed] | Coexistence+conditional supermixed/hybrid: First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)party with over 50% of vote gets all seats in multi-member constituencies (party block voting), otherwiseList PR (largest remainder, closed list)[3] | 188 | (50%/100%) | electoral districts | |
 Djibouti | National Assembly | 2018 | 3-28 | Fusion / majority jackpot (MBS): 80% of seats (rounded to the nearest integer) in each constituency are awarded to the party receiving the most votes (party block voting), remaining seats are allocated proportionally to other parties receiving over 10% (closed list,D'Hondt method) | 65 | 80% | regions | |
Historically party block voting was used in theUS House of Representatives before 1967 but mainly before 1847; and in France, in the pre-World War I decades of theThird Republic which began in 1870.
Thescrutin de liste (Fr.scrutin, voting byballot, andliste, a list) was, beforeWorld War I, asystem of election of national representatives inFrance by which the electors of adepartment voted for a party-homogeneous slate of deputies to be elected to serve it nationally. It was distinguished from thescrutin d'arrondissement, also calledscrutin uninominal, under which the electors in eacharrondissement returned one deputy.[4]
The following is a table of every instance of the use of the general ticket in theUnited States Congress. General ticket system was common until limited to special use by the 1842Apportionment Bill and locally implementing legislation which took effect after the 1845–47 Congress.[5] Until the Congress ending in 1967 it took effect in rare instances, save for a two cases of ex-Confederate States – for one term – these had tiny delegations, were for top-up members to be at-large allocated pending redistricting, or were added to the union since the last census.
| Congress | Dates | State and number of representatives |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | 1789–1791 | Connecticut (5), New Jersey (4), New Hampshire (3), Pennsylvania (8) |
| 2nd | 1791–1793 | Connecticut (5), New Jersey (4), New Hampshire (3) |
| 3rd | 1793–1795 | Connecticut (7), Georgia (2), New Jersey (5), New Hampshire (4), Pennsylvania (13), Rhode Island (2) |
| 4th and5th | 1795–1799 | Connecticut (7), Georgia (2), New Jersey (5), New Hampshire (4), Rhode Island (2) |
| 6th | 1799–1801 | Connecticut (7), Georgia (2), New Hampshire (4), Rhode Island (2) |
| 7th | 1801–1803 | Connecticut (7), Georgia (2), New Jersey (5), New Hampshire (4), Rhode Island (2) |
| 8th | 1803–1805 | Connecticut (7), Georgia (4), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (5), Rhode Island (2), Tennessee (3) |
| 9th to12th | 1805–1813 | Connecticut (7), Georgia (4), New Jersey (6), New Jersey (5), Rhode Island (2) |
| 13th | 1813–1815 | Connecticut (7), Delaware (2), Georgia (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2), Vermont (6) |
| 14th to16th | 1815–1821 | Connecticut (7), Delaware (2), Georgia (6), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2), Vermont (6) |
| 17th | 1821–1823 | Connecticut (7), Delaware (2), Georgia (6), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2) |
| 18th | 1823–1825 | Connecticut (6), Georgia (7), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2), Vermont (5) |
| 19th | 1825–1827 | Connecticut (6), Georgia (7), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2) |
| 20th | 1827–1829 | Connecticut (6), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2) |
| 21st and22nd | 1829–1833 | Connecticut (6), Georgia (7), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (6), Rhode Island (2) |
| 23rd and24th | 1833–1837 | Connecticut (6), Georgia (9), Missouri (2), Mississippi (2), New Jersey (6), New Hampshire (5), Rhode Island (2) |
| 25th and26th | 1837–1841 | New Hampshire (5), Georgia (9), Missouri (2), Mississippi (2), New Jersey (6), Rhode Island (2) |
| 27th | 1841–1843 | Alabama (5), Georgia (9), Missouri (2), Mississippi (2), New Hampshire (5), New Jersey (6), Rhode Island (2) |
| 28th | 1843–1845 | New Hampshire (4), Georgia (8), Missouri (5), Mississippi (4) |
| 29th | 1845–1847 | Iowa (2), New Hampshire (4), Missouri (5), Mississippi (4) |
| 30th | 1847–1849 | Wisconsin (2) |
| 31st to34th | 1849–1857 | California (2) |
| 35th to37th | 1857–1863 | California (2), Minnesota (2) |
| 38th to42nd | 1863–1873 | California (3) |
| 43rd to47th | 1873–1883 | Florida (2), Kansas (3) |
| 48th | 1883–1885 | Maine (4) |
| 51st and52nd | 1889–1893 | South Dakota (2) |
| 53rd to57th | 1893–1903 | South Dakota (2), Washington (2) |
| 58th to60th | 1903–1909 | North Dakota (2), South Dakota (2), Washington (3) |
| 61st | 1909–1911 | North Dakota (2), South Dakota (2) |
| 62nd | 1911–1913 | North Dakota (2), New Mexico (2), South Dakota (2) |
| 63rd | 1913–1915 | Idaho (2), Montana (2), Utah (2) |
| 64th | 1915–1917 | Idaho (2), Montana (2) |
| 65th to72nd | 1917–1933 | Idaho (2), Montana (2) |
| 73rd | 1933–1935 | Kentucky (9), Minnesota (9), Missouri (13), North Dakota (2), Virginia (9) |
| 74th to77th | 1935–1943 | North Dakota (2) |
| 78th to80th | 1943–1949 | Arizona (2), New Mexico (2), North Dakota (2) |
| 81st to87th | 1949–1963 | New Mexico (2), North Dakota (2) |
| 88th | 1963–1965 | Alabama (8), Hawaii (2), New Mexico (2) |
| 89th and90th | 1965–1969 | Hawaii (2), New Mexico (2) |
| 91st | 1969–1971 | Hawaii (2) |
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Scrutin de Liste".Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 24 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 487.
