[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
Log in

Power, prices, and incomes in voting systems

  • Published:
Mathematical Programming Submit manuscript

The “value” or “worth” of a man is, as of all other things, his price, that is to say, so much as would be given for the use of his power.

Abstract

The power of voters in a voting game (simple game) is viewed as the amount they would be paid by a lobbyist buying their votes. Equilibrium prices for the voters are shown to exist whenever there is no veto player, and the expected incomes of the voters are compared with other measures of their voting power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. John F. Banzhaf III, “Weighted voting doesn't work: a mathematical analysis”,Rutgers Law Review 31 (1965) 317–343.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Steven J. Brams,Game theory and politics (Free Press, New York, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  3. James J. Coleman, “Control of collectivities and the power of a collectivity to act”, in: B. Lieberman, ed.,Social choice (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  4. George Lockhart,Memoirs of the affairs of Scotland (London, 1714).

  5. William F. Lucas, “Measuring power in weighted voting systems”,Case studies in applied mathematics, CUPM Report of the Mathematical Association of America, 1976.

  6. Guillermo Owen,Game theory (Saunders, Philadelphia, PA, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lloyd S. Shapley, “A value forn-person games”, in: H.W. Kuhn and A.W. Tucker, eds.,Contributions to the theory of games, Vol. II,Annals of Mathematics Studies, No. 28 (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1953) pp. 307–317.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lloyd S. Shapley and Martin Shubik, “A method for evaluating the distribution of power in a committee system”,American Political Science Review 48 (1954) 787–792.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. Shubik and H.P. Young,The noncooperative value of a voting game, Conference on game theory and political science, Hyannis, MA (1977).

  10. H.P. Young, “Lobbying and campaigning with applications to the measure of power”, Research Rept. RR-77-013, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria (June 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  11. H.P. Young,On a class of tactical games having application to political lobbying, Conference on Game Theory and Political Science, Hyannis, MA (1977).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant MPS 75-07414 with the Graduate School of the City University of New York.

The author wishes particularly to thank Lloyd Shapley for a number of helpful remarks on the presentation.

Thomas Hobbes

Leviathan, Pt. I, Ch. 10

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Young, H.P. Power, prices, and incomes in voting systems. Mathematical Programming 14, 129–148 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01588961

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01588961

Key words

Navigation