1012:
147:
987:
22:
999:
1215:
Delegates can only be awarded to viable preference groups. After the final alignment has concluded, a decimal number, quota, (# of members within a presidential preference group) x (# of delegates elected from that precinct caucus) divided by (Total number of eligible precinct caucus participants) is
1199:
After the end of this time period, the subcaucuses are 'frozen', the number of people in each subcaucus are counted, and each group is assigned the appropriate number of delegate spots. The numbers of delegates assigned are calculated according to a method that rounds the quotas, i.e. are typically
1222:
After the preliminary rounding, one looks for
Unallocated Delegates or Too Many Delegates. Unallocated Delegates: If any delegates are remaining after rounding, the extra delegate(s) are distributed starting with the candidate that is closest to rounding up to the next whole number. In the case of
1086:
contest, when it was noted that the previous rules allowed a bare majority to fill all the delegate spots with their supporters, thus denying any representation to minority viewpoints. It was a way of meeting the requirements of the
Democratic Party
1164:
After all subcaucuses have been nominated, the meeting chair will designate a place in the building for each subcaucus to meet. Then the people present walk to the location of the subcaucus that they want to participate in (the
1180:, a subcaucus must have enough participants to elect a single delegate. Thus if there are 250 people participating, and 10 delegates spots for the next higher meeting, each subcaucus must have at least 25 people to be
1235:
Each group elects from within itself people to fill their number of delegate spots (and also an
Alternate for each spot). When they have completed their elections, they report the people chosen back to the meeting
1061:
used in political party meetings to choose delegates to higher meetings. It is designed to ensure that people in the minority are able to elect delegates representing their views to the higher body, as opposed to
1191:
An additional period of time is allowed for people from non-viable subcaucuses to move, and for mergers and trading between subcaucuses. (Viability calculations rarely come out exactly, so the subcaucus with the
1212:, like the original Hamilton method. The rules for determining number of delegates to be apportioned out of a total available need to be specified precisely, with a typical set of rules given below.
1196:
will get the extra delegate(s). So one subcaucus might negotiate a deal with another to send some people over to their group, to get that extra delegate spot, in exchange for some consideration.)
1144:
to assign the final delegates for some precincts when the number of participants dropped during the process and an insufficient number of participants existed to assign all the delegates.
1326:
1400:
1040:
1129:, each sub-caucus elects their own delegates from within their own group. The number of delegates elected from each subcaucus is determined by the size of that subcaucus.
1223:
too Many
Delegates: the extra delegates are subtracted the extra delegate(s) starting with the candidate that is furthest away from rounding up to the next whole number.
1141:
1102:
system was planned so that minority viewpoints were elected to delegate spots in proportion to their support at the meeting. One of the principal designers was
731:
1153:
Individual people nominate by name a subcaucus. Typically, the name will include a candidate (or "uncommitted") and one or more issues, for example
763:
625:
620:
1075:
1033:
726:
408:
1346:
1122:) where a large group of people has to elect a smaller number of delegates to represent them at the next higher party meeting or convention.
932:
183:
1026:
39:
105:
927:
917:
667:
638:
578:
1229:
If there is an exact decimal tie, a game of chance is used to break the tie. The winner(s) will keep the additional delegate(s).
86:
649:
174:
58:
712:
43:
1125:
It basically means that the caucus meeting breaks into smaller sub-caucus meetings, and that rather than electing delegates
354:
339:
324:
65:
970:
590:
513:
434:
402:
384:
225:
955:
1314:
1287:
1219:
Preliminary rounding is first applied: If a decimal is 0.5 and above round up. If a decimal is below 0.5 round down.
1088:
846:
829:
796:
776:
560:
548:
518:
319:
277:
210:
72:
654:
32:
1126:
1063:
702:
695:
179:
1288:
Professor Leonid
Hurwicz: Ninety-year-old economist who last year became the oldest recipient of a Nobel Prize.
1209:
1193:
756:
684:
673:
536:
523:
506:
483:
461:
424:
414:
54:
1380:
April 1969. 4p. (presented to: DFL Constitutional Reform
Committee-{also known as the “walking subcaucus”}.)
1331:
1201:
882:
736:
419:
911:
791:
721:
528:
1226:
The exception is made for a viable group’s only delegate. A candidate can never lose their only delegate.
1275:
819:
659:
543:
349:
328:
260:
238:
1367:
1011:
877:
950:
937:
905:
169:
1291:
1058:
856:
690:
343:
1249:
It can take a lot of time to complete. Often people get tired and go home during the subcaucusing.
1016:
887:
498:
282:
965:
79:
1255:
The negotiating between subcaucuses can leave an uncomfortable feeling of 'back-room dealing'.
1205:
922:
892:
814:
751:
585:
312:
287:
270:
138:
1092:
1066:, in which the majority may elect all the delegates from members of the majority viewpoint.
1003:
960:
851:
839:
553:
429:
255:
249:
231:
220:
215:
203:
164:
126:
1083:
1079:
991:
824:
679:
644:
565:
476:
379:
302:
244:
122:
146:
1373:
1103:
861:
801:
786:
597:
466:
441:
292:
986:
1394:
1258:
It is very difficult to get the meeting back together to complete any other business.
870:
570:
358:
196:
159:
134:
610:
374:
367:
297:
1232:
Procedure requires to make sure every viable candidate has at least one delegate.
1107:
488:
446:
389:
334:
21:
1188:
have to either move to another, or merge their subcaucus with a similar one.
456:
451:
998:
1368:
2014-2015 Official Call of the
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party of Minnesota
707:
1378:
A voting system reform proposal to provide for minority representation.
1246:
The process is complicated and difficult for most people to understand.
493:
1385:
In
Pursuit of the White House: How We Choose Our Presidential Nominees
1119:
1327:"Sometimes, Iowa Democrats award caucus delegates with a coin flip"
1074:
The walking subcaucus system was designed in the late 1960s in the
1303:
1172:
After a specified period of time, each subcaucus is checked for
1133:
15:
1140:. It was highlighted in news stories in February 2016 when a
1118:
This process is typically used at a party meeting (such as a
145:
1347:"CAUCUS MEMO - Delegate Count Scenarios and Tie Breakers"
1252:
The walking around part of the process is often chaotic.
46:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
1132:It is also used in the Democratic caucuses of
1401:Proportional representation electoral systems
1034:
8:
1041:
1027:
117:
1315:How Delegates are Awarded on Caucus Night
106:Learn how and when to remove this message
1268:
1091:while retaining a caucus rather than a
133:
1304:Second Choice Dynamic in Iowa Caucuses
1184:. People in subcaucuses that are not
1106:, a 1968 McCarthy delegate and later
7:
44:adding citations to reliable sources
14:
1010:
997:
985:
933:McKelvey–Schofield chaos theorem
579:Semi-proportional representation
211:First preference plurality (FPP)
20:
31:needs additional citations for
1278:, National Academy of Sciences
1155:Franken-education-livable jobs
971:Harsanyi's utilitarian theorem
928:Moulin's impossibility theorem
893:Conflicting majorities paradox
1:
1208:, but on a modification of a
797:Frustrated majorities paradox
966:Condorcet dominance theorems
906:Social and collective choice
1136:, calling the sub-caucuses
632:By mechanism of combination
403:Proportional representation
1417:
1078:party, in reaction to the
830:Multiple districts paradox
561:Fractional approval voting
549:Interactive representation
1064:plurality at-large voting
777:Paradoxes and pathologies
626:Mixed-member proportional
621:Mixed-member majoritarian
616:By results of combination
507:Approval-based committees
1210:largest remainder method
956:Condorcet's jury theorem
757:Double simultaneous vote
732:Rural–urban proportional
727:Dual-member proportional
689:
678:
645:Parallel (superposition)
537:Fractional social choice
524:Expanding approvals rule
353:
338:
323:
254:
243:
219:
1332:The Des Moines Register
1089:Rules Reform Commission
883:Tyranny of the majority
660:Fusion (majority bonus)
477:Quota-remainder methods
1057:system is a method of
1017:Mathematics portal
923:Majority impossibility
912:Impossibility theorems
708:Negative vote transfer
529:Method of equal shares
150:
1110:winner in Economics.
820:Best-is-worst paradox
809:Pathological response
544:Direct representation
197:Single-winner methods
149:
1004:Economics portal
951:Median voter theorem
170:Comparative politics
40:improve this article
1059:proportional voting
992:Politics portal
703:Vote linkage system
674:Seat linkage system
261:Ranked-choice (RCV)
55:"Walking subcaucus"
1383:William G. Mayer,
1142:coin-toss was used
888:Discursive dilemma
847:Lesser evil voting
722:Supermixed systems
425:Largest remainders
283:Round-robin voting
151:
1387:1996, p. 114
1194:highest remainder
1159:Uncommitted-Labor
1138:preference groups
1100:walking subcaucus
1055:walking subcaucus
1051:
1050:
938:Gibbard's theorem
878:Dominance paradox
815:Perverse response
519:Phragmen's method
385:Majority judgment
313:Positional voting
271:Condorcet methods
139:electoral systems
116:
115:
108:
90:
1408:
1360:
1359:
1357:
1356:
1351:
1343:
1337:
1336:
1323:
1317:
1312:
1306:
1301:
1295:
1285:
1279:
1273:
1043:
1036:
1029:
1015:
1014:
1002:
1001:
990:
989:
945:Positive results
840:Strategic voting
737:Majority jackpot
694:
683:
554:Liquid democracy
430:National remnant
420:Highest averages
357:
342:
327:
259:
250:Alternative vote
248:
232:Partisan primary
224:
165:Mechanism design
118:
111:
104:
100:
97:
91:
89:
48:
24:
16:
1416:
1415:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1391:
1390:
1364:
1363:
1354:
1352:
1349:
1345:
1344:
1340:
1325:
1324:
1320:
1313:
1309:
1302:
1298:
1294:, 26 June 2008
1286:
1282:
1274:
1270:
1265:
1243:
1202:divisor methods
1150:
1116:
1084:Hubert Humphrey
1080:Eugene McCarthy
1072:
1047:
1009:
1008:
996:
984:
976:
975:
942:
918:Arrow's theorem
908:
898:
897:
866:
836:
825:No-show paradox
806:
792:Cloning paradox
782:Spoiler effects
779:
769:
768:
743:
630:
613:
603:
602:
575:
566:Maximal lottery
533:
514:Thiele's method
503:
473:
405:
395:
394:
380:Approval voting
368:Cardinal voting
364:
309:
303:Maximal lottery
267:
199:
189:
112:
101:
95:
92:
49:
47:
37:
25:
12:
11:
5:
1414:
1412:
1404:
1403:
1393:
1392:
1389:
1388:
1381:
1374:Leonid Hurwicz
1371:
1362:
1361:
1338:
1318:
1307:
1296:
1280:
1276:Leonid Hurwicz
1267:
1266:
1264:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1256:
1253:
1250:
1247:
1242:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1233:
1230:
1227:
1224:
1220:
1217:
1213:
1206:D'Hondt method
1197:
1189:
1170:
1162:
1149:
1146:
1115:
1112:
1071:
1068:
1049:
1048:
1046:
1045:
1038:
1031:
1023:
1020:
1019:
1007:
1006:
994:
981:
978:
977:
974:
973:
968:
963:
958:
953:
941:
940:
935:
930:
925:
920:
909:
904:
903:
900:
899:
896:
895:
890:
885:
880:
865:
864:
862:Turkey-raising
859:
854:
849:
835:
834:
833:
832:
822:
817:
805:
804:
802:Center squeeze
799:
794:
789:
787:Spoiler effect
780:
775:
774:
771:
770:
767:
766:
761:
760:
759:
746:By ballot type
742:
741:
740:
739:
734:
729:
719:
718:
717:
716:
715:
710:
700:
699:
698:
687:
664:
663:
662:
657:
652:
647:
629:
628:
623:
614:
609:
608:
605:
604:
601:
600:
598:Limited voting
595:
594:
593:
574:
573:
568:
563:
558:
557:
556:
551:
532:
531:
526:
521:
516:
502:
501:
496:
491:
486:
472:
471:
470:
469:
467:Localized list
464:
459:
454:
449:
439:
438:
437:
435:Biproportional
432:
427:
422:
406:
401:
400:
397:
396:
393:
392:
387:
382:
377:
363:
362:
347:
332:
308:
307:
306:
305:
300:
295:
290:
280:
266:
265:
264:
263:
252:
239:Instant-runoff
236:
235:
234:
226:Jungle primary
213:
202:Single vote -
200:
195:
194:
191:
190:
188:
187:
177:
172:
167:
162:
156:
153:
152:
142:
141:
131:
130:
114:
113:
28:
26:
19:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1413:
1402:
1399:
1398:
1396:
1386:
1382:
1379:
1375:
1372:
1369:
1366:
1365:
1348:
1342:
1339:
1334:
1333:
1328:
1322:
1319:
1316:
1311:
1308:
1305:
1300:
1297:
1293:
1292:The Telegraph
1289:
1284:
1281:
1277:
1272:
1269:
1262:
1257:
1254:
1251:
1248:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1234:
1231:
1228:
1225:
1221:
1218:
1214:
1211:
1207:
1203:
1200:not based on
1198:
1195:
1190:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1171:
1168:
1163:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1151:
1147:
1145:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1130:
1128:
1123:
1121:
1113:
1111:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1096:
1094:
1090:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1076:Minnesota DFL
1069:
1067:
1065:
1060:
1056:
1044:
1039:
1037:
1032:
1030:
1025:
1024:
1022:
1021:
1018:
1013:
1005:
1000:
995:
993:
988:
983:
982:
980:
979:
972:
969:
967:
964:
962:
961:May's theorem
959:
957:
954:
952:
949:
948:
947:
946:
939:
936:
934:
931:
929:
926:
924:
921:
919:
916:
915:
914:
913:
907:
902:
901:
894:
891:
889:
886:
884:
881:
879:
876:
875:
874:
873:
872:
871:majority rule
869:Paradoxes of
863:
860:
858:
855:
853:
850:
848:
845:
844:
843:
842:
841:
831:
828:
827:
826:
823:
821:
818:
816:
813:
812:
811:
810:
803:
800:
798:
795:
793:
790:
788:
785:
784:
783:
778:
773:
772:
765:
762:
758:
755:
754:
753:
750:
749:
748:
747:
738:
735:
733:
730:
728:
725:
724:
723:
720:
714:
711:
709:
706:
705:
704:
701:
697:
692:
688:
686:
681:
677:
676:
675:
672:
671:
670:
669:
665:
661:
658:
656:
653:
651:
648:
646:
643:
642:
641:
640:
635:
634:
633:
627:
624:
622:
619:
618:
617:
612:
611:Mixed systems
607:
606:
599:
596:
592:
589:
588:
587:
584:
583:
582:
581:
580:
572:
571:Random ballot
569:
567:
564:
562:
559:
555:
552:
550:
547:
546:
545:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
530:
527:
525:
522:
520:
517:
515:
512:
511:
510:
509:
508:
500:
497:
495:
492:
490:
487:
485:
482:
481:
480:
479:
478:
468:
465:
463:
460:
458:
455:
453:
450:
448:
445:
444:
443:
440:
436:
433:
431:
428:
426:
423:
421:
418:
417:
416:
415:Apportionment
413:
412:
411:
410:
404:
399:
398:
391:
388:
386:
383:
381:
378:
376:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
360:
356:
351:
350:Antiplurality
348:
345:
341:
336:
333:
330:
326:
321:
318:
317:
316:
315:
314:
304:
301:
299:
296:
294:
291:
289:
286:
285:
284:
281:
279:
278:Condorcet-IRV
276:
275:
274:
273:
272:
262:
257:
253:
251:
246:
242:
241:
240:
237:
233:
230:
229:
227:
222:
217:
214:
212:
209:
208:
207:
205:
198:
193:
192:
185:
181:
178:
176:
173:
171:
168:
166:
163:
161:
160:Social choice
158:
157:
155:
154:
148:
144:
143:
140:
136:
135:Social choice
132:
128:
124:
120:
119:
110:
107:
99:
88:
85:
81:
78:
74:
71:
67:
64:
60:
57: –
56:
52:
51:Find sources:
45:
41:
35:
34:
29:This article
27:
23:
18:
17:
1384:
1377:
1353:. Retrieved
1341:
1330:
1321:
1310:
1299:
1283:
1271:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1166:
1158:
1154:
1137:
1131:
1124:
1117:
1099:
1097:
1073:
1054:
1052:
944:
943:
910:
868:
867:
852:Exaggeration
838:
837:
808:
807:
781:
745:
744:
713:Mixed ballot
668:Compensatory
666:
639:compensatory
636:
631:
615:
577:
576:
535:
534:
505:
504:
475:
474:
462:List-free PR
407:
375:Score voting
366:
365:
311:
310:
298:Ranked pairs
269:
268:
201:
102:
93:
83:
76:
69:
62:
50:
38:Please help
33:verification
30:
1108:Nobel Prize
1104:Leo Hurwicz
752:Single vote
655:Conditional
650:Coexistence
499:Quota Borda
489:Schulze STV
447:Closed list
390:STAR voting
335:Borda count
1355:2023-11-25
1263:References
1241:Criticisms
857:Truncation
586:Cumulative
409:Party-list
184:By country
175:Comparison
66:newspapers
1216:computed.
1204:like the
1174:viability
1148:Procedure
764:Dual-vote
457:Panachage
452:Open list
442:List type
320:Plurality
216:Two-round
204:plurality
127:Economics
96:July 2010
1395:Category
1176:. To be
1127:at-large
1095:system.
484:Hare STV
123:Politics
121:A joint
1167:walking
1093:primary
1082:–
1070:History
494:CPO-STV
344:Baldwin
293:Schulze
288:Minimax
206:methods
80:scholar
1370:Page 4
1236:chair.
1186:viable
1182:viable
1178:viable
1169:part).
1120:caucus
359:Coombs
129:series
82:
75:
68:
61:
53:
1350:(PDF)
696:'MMP'
685:'AMS'
87:JSTOR
73:books
1134:Iowa
1098:The
1053:The
637:Non-
591:SNTV
180:List
137:and
125:and
59:news
1376:,
1157:or
1114:Use
355:el.
340:el.
329:IRV
325:el.
42:by
1397::
1329:.
1290:,
691:NZ
680:UK
256:US
245:UK
228:)
221:US
1358:.
1335:.
1161:.
1042:e
1035:t
1028:v
693::
682::
361:)
352:(
346:)
337:(
331:)
322:(
258::
247::
223::
218:(
186:)
182:(
109:)
103:(
98:)
94:(
84:·
77:·
70:·
63:·
36:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
