The current International Monetary Fund (IMF) voting rights, based on how much money a member state contributes to the IMF through the quota system, does not fairly reflect the changing global economic landscape. The economic importance of countries whose economies have quickly expanded is not expressed fairly in their quota allocation and the minute quotas for smaller, less-developed countries prevents them from having any real say. The simplest, and most attainable, reform to the voting system that will give expanding nations and smaller, poorer nations more of a voice within the IMF is to adopt a double-majority voting method, or voting by count and account. .
Voting by count and account is a method coined by Professors Barry O'Neill and Bezalel Peleg, who sought to create a voting mechanism for international organizations that recognized the greater power and contribution of the larger members but preserved some influence for the smaller ones. (O'Neill and Peleg, 1) Two tallies are made using this method: the number of supporting members and the sum of their "weights. " .
In the case of the IMF, the first tally would simply count each country's vote and the second tally would factor in each country's weight, based on its financial contribution to the IMF, or quota. Under this new system, a motion or vote could only pass if it attained a majority by both count and account. The advantage of the double-majority/count and account method is that it augments the voting power of economically-rising nations and poorer nations without overly diminishing the power and influence of current nations with strong voting power via the quota system. Simply put, this method recognizes the equality of all nations (by requiring a majority of members), while preserving the order among them (by requiring a majority of weighted votes). (Rapkin and Strand, 14-15) .
The most important function of the IMF is to provide financial aid to its 188-member nations during financial struggles and crises.
