HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026322.jpg
1.52 MB
Extraction Summary
6
People
1
Organizations
3
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Email chain
File Size:
1.52 MB
Summary
This document is an email chain from September 11, 2018, between Larry Summers and Eric Maskin concerning the political implications of Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV). They discuss RCV's potential to promote centrism, its hypothetical effect on the 2016 US presidential election, and concerns about its complexity depressing turnout among minority and low-income voters. Although requested in the context of an Epstein-related query, this document contains no mention of Jeffrey Epstein, his associates (other than Summers in a non-Epstein context), or any related activities.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Larry Summers | Correspondent |
Identified as 'LHS' and 'Larry', he participated in an email discussion about Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV). His signatu...
|
| Eric Maskin | Correspondent |
Identified as 'Maskin, Eric' and 'Eric', he participated in an email discussion with Larry Summers about Ranked-Choic...
|
| Adam Friedman | Project contributor |
Mentioned by Eric Maskin for his 'impressive' commitment to the project on voting rules being discussed.
|
| Bernie Sanders | Political figure |
Mentioned in a hypothetical scenario where RCV in the 2016 election would have allowed him to run as an independent.
|
| Trump | Political figure |
Mentioned as the winner of the 2016 election, and who might have lost to Clinton under a hypothetical RCV scenario.
|
| Clinton | Political figure |
Mentioned as the likely second-choice candidate for Bernie Sanders supporters, who could have won the 2016 election i...
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| House Oversight |
Timeline (2 events)
2016
The 2016 US presidential election is discussed as a case study for the potential impact of Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV).
United States
Morning of September 11, 2018
A meeting took place between Larry Summers and Eric Maskin to discuss a project on voting rules.
Unspecified
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as a state where Hillary Clinton could have won in the 2016 election under a hypothetical RCV system.
|
|
|
Mentioned as a state where Hillary Clinton could have won in the 2016 election under a hypothetical RCV system.
|
|
|
Mentioned as a state where Hillary Clinton could have won in the 2016 election under a hypothetical RCV system.
|
Relationships (2)
They corresponded via email and met in person on September 11, 2018, to discuss a project on voting theory.
Eric Maskin mentions Adam Friedman's 'impressive' commitment to the project they are discussing with Larry Summers.
Key Quotes (4)
"If RCV had been used in 2016, Bernie Sanders could have run as an independent in the general election without fear of guaranteeing a Trump victory."Source
— Eric
(From an email fragment discussing the potential impact of RCV on the 2016 election.)
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026322.jpg
Quote #1
"He said he had heard that because of its greater complexity African American and lower income turnout was depressed. Is there evidence on turnout impacts?"Source
— Larry Summers
(In an email to Eric Maskin, relaying a concern about RCV's potential negative impact on certain voter demographics.)
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026322.jpg
Quote #2
"Voting rules may seem nerdy and dry, but they can make an enormous difference to actual politics"Source
— Eric Maskin
(In an email to Larry Summers, emphasizing the importance of their project on voting theory.)
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026322.jpg
Quote #3
"The formal argument that RCV promotes centrism better than the current system (plurality rule) is straightforward."Source
— Eric Maskin
(Explaining the theoretical basis for Ranked-Choice Voting in an email to Larry Summers.)
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026322.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,489 characters)
In fact the increase in the diversity of candidates under RCV is related to turn-out. If RCV had been used in 2016, Bernie Sanders could have run as an independent in the general election without fear of guaranteeing a Trump victory. Many of the Bernie supporters who stayed home on election day might then have voted---and presumably would have ranked Clinton second. This would have given her a victory over Trump in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania (and possibly elsewhere).
Eric
From: LHS [REDACTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 7:52 PM
To: Maskin, Eric <[REDACTED]>
Cc: Ihsoffice [REDACTED]
Subject: Re: This morning
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 7:52 PM
To: Maskin, Eric <[REDACTED]>
Cc: Ihsoffice [REDACTED]
Subject: Re: This morning
I get that formal argument
What about aspects not quite in model.
More folk will run from extremes if they can attract more First run votes. Candidates can position a bit.
More folk will run from extremes if they can attract more First run votes. Candidates can position a bit.
Separately I pitched this to someone today.
He said he had heard that because of its greater complexity African American and lower income turnout was depressed.
Is there evidence on turnout impacts?
Is there evidence on turnout impacts?
Sent from my iPhone
Please direct all scheduling inquiries to my office at: [REDACTED]
Follow me on twitter @lhsummers
www.larrysummers.com
www.larrysummers.com
On Sep 11, 2018, at 6:05 PM, Maskin, Eric <[REDACTED]> wrote:
Hi Larry,
Thank you very much for taking the meeting this morning. I'm glad you found it worthwhile, and I agree with you that Adam Friedman's commitment to the project is impressive.
I AM serious about working on this---it's a nice opportunity to make important practical use of some interesting theory.
Voting rules may seem nerdy and dry, but they can make an enormous difference to actual politics
Voting rules may seem nerdy and dry, but they can make an enormous difference to actual politics
The formal argument that RCV promotes centrism better than the current system (plurality rule) is straightforward.
Suppose that most voters vote ideologically in the sense that the closer a candidate is to their own position on the left-right spectrum, the more like they are to vote for him. Then under majority rule (my favorite voting system)---in which voters rank candidates and the winner is the candidate who beats all other in pairwise comparisons----the winner will be the median voter's favorite candidate -----in other words, the most centrist candidate gets elected (this assumes that there are enough candidates running so that there is one who is reasonably close to the median voter). Now observe that RCV is in between majority rule and plurality rule, and so will promote centrism better than plurality rule.
Suppose that most voters vote ideologically in the sense that the closer a candidate is to their own position on the left-right spectrum, the more like they are to vote for him. Then under majority rule (my favorite voting system)---in which voters rank candidates and the winner is the candidate who beats all other in pairwise comparisons----the winner will be the median voter's favorite candidate -----in other words, the most centrist candidate gets elected (this assumes that there are enough candidates running so that there is one who is reasonably close to the median voter). Now observe that RCV is in between majority rule and plurality rule, and so will promote centrism better than plurality rule.
Best wishes, Eric
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026322
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document