Approval voting comes from a family of elections called "cardinal" methods. In cardinal methods, voters give a score to each candidate. The three most well known are:

• Plurality Voting (the current system) - Voters select one candidate essentially giving them a score of "1." By default, the voter is giving a score of "0" to all other candidates. The candidate that receives the highest overall "score" wins.

  
  

• Approval Voting - Voters select all the candidates they support giving each of them a score of "1." Those not selected receive a score of "0." The choice to give or deny support to each candidate is what differentiates approval from plurality. The candidate that receives the highest overall "score" wins.

  
  

• Score Voting - Voters give a number value to a candidate, for example 0 to 5 with 5 signaling the most support. Scores are independent and not mutually exclusive (i.e. can give three 5s and two 1s). The candidate that has the highest average of support wins.

While CES supports a cardinal method, approval voting, it does not necessarily support all. CES actively works to oppose plurality voting, which is too simple a solution to ever more complex elections. CES does not oppose score voting. However, score voting (and its relatives) do not meet all of our seven criteria for voting methods for the general public. The primary concerns for CES around score voting revolve around accessibility and cost, among other barriers to use in public elections. While undoubtedly methods like approval voting and score voting are vast improvements for voters, CES advocates for only approval voting at this time.

We find approval voting to be a perfect mix between its two relatives, balancing simplicity with radical improvement.