Statement Regarding Policy Decision to Resolve the Tie in the 2023 Presidential Election
March 21, 2023
ESS Members,
The purpose of the council is to act as the elected student representatives within the ESS. The 2023 Presidential Election resulted in a tie and we would like to explain the process behind the final outcome of the election.
At the time of the results, the ESS did not have a precedent set in our Policy for how to solve a tie. Our Policy indicates that in the event of an unexpected circumstance during the election not outlined in policy, an emergency council meeting must be called to vote on an appropriate solution. All council members attended the emergency meeting on the day of the results.
After asking other universities how their own engineering students’ societies solve a tie, we learned of 3 primary systems.
- A by-election or runoff election.
- A chief returning officer (CRO) vote or council vote tie breaker.
- A coin toss.
The pros to the coin toss were that it allowed for an unbiased decision. The cons were that it was too random of an outcome for such an important decision. The coin tossed was dismissed for this reason.
A runoff election is a shortened 24-48 hr campaign and voting period for the tied candidates. The pros to the runoff election are that it allows students to change their vote based on the tied candidates, accurately representing the decision of the student body. In an ideal runoff, a similar voter turnout to the initial election is reflected in the runoff election to get an accurate spread of the changed votes. The cons to a runoff election are its need to have the same voter turnout as the original election to make it an accurate representation. The main concern was that if voter turnout for the runoff election was low, this would not depict the best candidate decided by the student body, but would rather be a reflection of which candidate had the opportunity to speak to the most students in the short time frame. The condensed time frame would disregard the votes of the students who are not as aware of ESS updates or who are not close to one of the candidates.
A council vote tie breaker is when the council places their votes in an envelope before the voting period begins, and this envelope is given to the CRO to remain sealed unless in the event of a tie. If a tie occurs, the CRO will apply the council vote to complete the election. The pros to the council tiebreaker are that it allows students who understand the organization to decide between two candidates who were voted as equally good by the student body. The council members know what qualities the ESS needs in a President, and typically know the candidates and their leadership styles. The cons to the council tiebreaker are that it does not allow for students to change their vote to one of the tied candidates to see the changed spread from the student body.
Ideally, a high turnout runoff election would be the best option. However, voter turnout could not be guaranteed due to the time limit, last minute advertising, and inopportunity for candidates to re-campaign. This could cause a low turnout runoff. Because of this, the general consensus on council was that a council tiebreaker was better than the risk of a low turnout runoff election, as it would be a more informed decision of who the best candidate is based on leadership style and institutional knowledge, rather than a rushed runoff election with votes from only students close to the candidates or the ESS.
The risk of having a low turnout runoff election that would not be representative of the student body deterred the council from a runoff election. The initial election results show that the student body believes either candidate would be a good President. When brought to a vote, the council voted in favor of the council tiebreaker, which is the method other universities of our size use within their engineering societies.
The decision to proceed with a tie-breaker vote from council was not taken lightly or without consideration of the student body. In the next few weeks we will be officially writing into policy the method used to solve the rare occurrence of a tie in an election, and we welcome your feedback.