Block Voting

Block or bloc voting encompasses a group of electoral systems used to elect multiple candidates simultaneously within a single multimember district. These systems allocate to each voter as many votes as there are seats to fill, enabling voters to select several candidates at once. As a result, a cohesive voting bloc can secure all available seats, since block voting does not incorporate mechanisms to guarantee minority representation. The family of block voting systems forms part of the broader category of multiple non-transferable vote (MNTV) methods and is frequently associated with winner-take-all outcomes.
Block voting contrasts sharply with proportional representation, where the aim is to distribute seats in relation to vote share. In practice, block voting tends to amplify majoritarian results, often leading to landslide victories for the most popular party or slate.

Terminology

Block voting is commonly referred to as plurality at-large voting when used to elect representatives for an entire jurisdiction such as a city, province, or nation. In multimember districts, the terms block vote or bloc vote are standard. The description presented here concerns the unrestricted form of block voting, in which each voter receives as many votes as the number of available seats. This differs from limited voting, in which the number of votes per voter is smaller than the number of seats.
The term block voting may also denote a plurality election of party slates or electoral lists rather than individual candidates, particularly in party-centred political systems.

Types of block voting

Block voting systems generally involve the simultaneous election of several winners in a single non-transferable round of voting. In certain contexts, such as some French local elections, a two-round arrangement is used to narrow the field where no candidate achieves an absolute majority.

Plurality block voting

In plurality block voting, all candidates compete for m seats—known as the district magnitude. Each voter may select up to m candidates, though they are not required to use all their votes. The m candidates who receive the highest number of votes are elected, regardless of whether they obtain a majority.

Two-round block voting

Two-round block voting modifies plurality at-large procedures by thinning the field of candidates after a first round. A final round then determines the winners from among the remaining candidates.

Party block voting (general ticket)

Party block voting (PBV), also known as the general ticket, is the party-list counterpart to block voting. Instead of voting for individual candidates, voters select a party list. The winning party or slate typically secures every available seat, producing extremely majoritarian outcomes. The Parliament of Singapore employs a form of this system for many of its constituencies.

Approval block voting

Under block approval voting, voters may approve any number of candidates, provided they do not approve the same candidate more than once. While the method allows for more expressive voting, it often yields results similar to plurality block voting, with dominant slates winning all seats.

Preferential block voting

Preferential block voting also tends to produce landslide outcomes. Instead of marking checkboxes, voters rank candidates. A slate of candidates similar to the most preferred individual—often called “clones”—typically secures every seat, analogous to the result under plurality block voting. However, the group of winners corresponds to those who would succeed under an instant-runoff procedure applied repeatedly across the available seats.

Similar voting systems

Limited voting (partial block voting)

Partial block voting, or limited voting, reduces the number of votes each voter may cast to fewer than the number of seats. This allows cohesive minority groups to obtain representation. The Gibraltar Parliament uses this method: each voter has ten votes for seventeen seats, usually enabling the most popular party to win ten seats while the second party wins seven. The Spanish Senate also uses partial block voting for its four-member constituencies, permitting each voter to cast three votes.
Historically, several British constituencies elected three or four MPs using limited voting before the abolition of most multimember districts. Reducing the number of votes per voter lowers the effective threshold for election and increases the potential for outcomes resembling proportional representation when voters cast their votes strategically.

Examples of voting systems

Plurality block voting and majority block voting

Consider a three-member district with twelve candidates and 10,000 voters. Voters may cast up to three votes, one per candidate. Party A commands roughly 35% support, Party B about 25%, and the remainder support independent candidates, though they lean towards Party B when choosing between the two parties. If all voters cast their ballots sincerely, the three candidates with the highest vote totals win. In a two-round format, the second round allows voters whose preferred independent candidates have been eliminated to support alternatives—typically strengthening Party B—yet even then some winners achieve only pluralities rather than absolute majorities.

Block voting and approval block voting

In another scenario with the same district magnitude and electorate, varying the voting rule leads to notably different outcomes. Under plurality block voting, voters may cast up to three votes; under unlimited approval voting, they may vote for any number of candidates; under limited approval voting, they may cast up to six votes. Limited block voting restricts voters to two votes, while the single non-transferable vote permits only one.
If Party A enjoys 35% support driven by a particularly popular individual candidate, and Party B has 25% support with two strong candidates, plurality block voting is likely to give Party A all three seats. Under limited voting, the distribution typically yields two seats for the plurality party and one for the minority party. Approval methods can enable supporters of independent candidates to assist candidates outside their top preferences, sometimes reversing results that plurality block voting would produce.
Under the single non-transferable vote, the top three individual vote-getters win, regardless of party—often producing more mixed outcomes.