[RP TownTalk] How to Avoid Run Off Elections

Wed Dec 14 13:13:25 UTC 2005

 From what I have heard, a system called Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) 
could solve the problems of extra expense of special runoff elections 
when no candidate wins a majority. This was recently passed by the 
Takoma Park council and approved by voters there by 84%. Following is 
an article about IRV. At the end of the article is a short description 
of how IRV works. Check out the quotes from Paul Pinsky.
Jonah

The promise of a majority count
Takoma Park mulls instant runoff voting
By Sean Sands
Published November 11th 2005 in The Takoma Park Gazette

Takoma Park voters have given the city the go-ahead to adopt Maryland’s 
first instant runoff voting system, where voters rank their choices on 
the ballot instead of simply selecting one candidate.
"If people haven’t heard of instant runoff voting, the approach sounds 
very exotic. And Takoma Park has a little bit of an exotic image around 
the state,” said Robert Richie, executive director of the national 
nonprofit FairVote, The Center for Voting and Democracy, which is based 
in Takoma Park. "But at the same time, this is such a big win that 
clearly reached so deeply into the city’s voters that it reached a lot 
of mainstream people.”
Of the nearly 2,400 votes cast in the referendum on Tuesday, 1,992 
residents voted in favor of the measure.
"Takoma Park did take the lead in giving the franchise to [non-U.S. 
citizens] in the city, and several other localities followed suit,” 
Richie said. "So I hope in this case, the margin helps tell the story, 
and we’ll definitely emphasize that as we talk to people around the 
state about instant-runoff voting: that a huge percentage of people 
thought this was a good idea.”
Richie used the mayoral race in Annapolis as an example of how 
instant-runoff voting would have ensured that the winner received a 
majority of the votes cast. Mayor Ellen Moyer (D) won re-election with 
45 percent of the vote, while challengers Gilbert Renaut (I) and George 
O. Kelley Sr. (R) received 36 percent and 18 percent respectively.
Had Annapolis used instant runoff voting, voters would have ranked the 
three candidates on the ballot. Because no one candidate received a 
majority (50 percent plus one) of the votes, election judges would have 
eliminated Kelley from the race, holding an instant runoff between 
Moyer and Renaut by tabulating the second-choice votes on the ballots 
that initially went to Kelley. Those votes would have been added to 
Moyer’s and Renaut’s totals.
The end result would be one candidate receiving a majority, as opposed 
to the plurality system used today, where the winner is the candidate 
who receives the highest number of votes. Instant runoff voting would 
be used only in races where there are three or more candidates.
"I think instant runoff voting makes inordinate sense in any election,” 
said Sen. Paul G. Pinsky (D-Dist. 22) of University Park, who sponsored 
legislation in 2001 that would have implemented instant runoff voting 
in statewide elections. "It allows for and doesn’t discourage multiple 
voices and multiple candidates, and I think it increases ‘small-d’ 
democracy. If more and more jurisdictions adopt it, people will see 
that it works, and maybe they’ll be more open to utilizing it in 
broader elections, like statewide elections.”
Instant runoff voting, which is used in San Francisco, a handful of 
smaller American cities and Australia, also could change the way both 
voters and candidates approach elections: Negative campaign tactics, 
for instance, could prove costly.
"That wouldn’t be conducive to winning because you have to be people’s 
second choice as well as their first,” Richie said. "You definitely 
don’t want to alienate [another candidate’s] supporters, and I think 
that’s the most healthy change to the nasty campaigning, which is 
really off-putting to voters.”
The notion of changing how Marylanders vote does not seem to sit well 
with the political establishment.
"The two major parties that make up the members of the legislature are 
the ones who could potentially lose some of their power, authority and 
control,” Pinsky said. "So unless people really take an objective and 
enlightened view, some will play to their baser instincts and say, 
‘Look, this could negatively affect me.’”
Audra Miller, communications director for the Maryland Republican 
Party, said the state GOP prefers the existing voting system.
"We believe in the primary process; primary elections are something 
that we back very strongly as an opportunity for members of the party 
to determine who the best candidate is to go on to the general 
election,” she said. "Therefore, we are not proponents of instant 
runoff voting.”
State Democrats have not discussed the issue, and Josh White, the state 
party’s executive director, said members would need to know more about 
instant runoff voting before debating its merits.
"Our first impression is that with every change in voting, there are 
probably just as many unintended consequences, and that there’s likely 
not going to be a panacea or a perfect way of doing it,” White said. 
"But at the moment, we can probably say that we feel comfortable with 
the current system.”
For now, FairVote plans on using its successful campaign in Takoma Park 
to spark discussion across the state, while possibly targeting 
Annapolis as the next place for a serious effort. Richie said his group 
also would push the issue at the state level.
"Unfortunately, state lawmakers think they are experts on election 
law,” he said. "If you come up through a system one way, they think 
that means it’s the only way.”
How instant runoffs work

*	Voters rank all the candidates.
*	If no one wins a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is 
dropped.
*	An instant runoff follows among remaining candidates by tabulating 
the second-choice votes only on the ballots that initially went to the 
lowest-drawing candidate.
*	Those totals are added to the remaining candidates’ totals.
*	The person with the majority of the votes wins.

On Wednesday, December 14, 2005, at 01:40  AM, Jack R. Jones wrote:

> Dear Towntalkers,
>
> We are faced with about two months of not having representation
> because of a flawed Town Code. The current code which changed the
> elections from being won by a plurality to being won by a majority,
> was a worthy advance. Problem is that a different voting system could
> give the majority desired with out the additional expense in time and
> money caused by a run off election.
>
> The Town Council should give serious consideration to the "Borda
> Count" or "Approval Vote" systems that can give a majority winner, no
> matter how many candidates, without a run off election.
>
> Check it out on the link below.
>
> Read and Enjoy,
> Jack
> -- 
> "We have met the enemy, and he is us!" Pogo Possum
> http://theriverdaleobserver.blogspot.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> TownTalk mailing list
> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org is for automated subscription 
> processing only
> http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/
> towntalk_riverdale-park.org
>