Campaign 2006 and Bringing Instant Runoff Voting to
the Tipping Point
Instant runoff voting (IRV) is a powerful tool to hold
elected officials more accountable, establish more equity in voter turnout in
decisive elections and accommodate increased voter choice. These values are
particularly pronounced when combined with eliminating low-turnout runoffs or
primary elections. The movement for fair voting has arrived at a watershed
moment, as victories in this November’s three major campaigns would be a
significant boost for IRV toward mainstream acceptance across the country and
would increase pressure on the voting equipment industry to adapt machines and
software to make it easy for other cities and states to enact IRV. In the wake
of a major state legislative advance in North Carolina that will result in a
statewide IRV election the next time there is a vacancy in a judicial office,
there are campaigns to elect majority winners in spoiler-free November
elections with IRV in three jurisdictions: Pierce County, Washington
(population 760,000), Oakland, California (population 400,000) and Minneapolis,
Minnesota (population 390,000). A sweep of these campaigns along with an
advisory measure in Davis (CA) and likely measure in Aspen (CO) would provide a
major boost to IRV, with immediate statewide reform consequences in
November 2006 Campaigns: Three Major
Opportunities Highlighted by
Since adoption of IRV in
Now we have three major campaigns for IRV, each of which would
fold a low turnout primary into the general election using IRV.
·
[www.betterballotcampaign.org]
o
What it is: To
take effect in the next city elections in 2009, this measure would eliminate
the city’s September nonpartisan primary (one in which the top two candidates
in each race currently advance to the general election) and adopt IRV for all
major city offices and choice voting for down ballot offices held at-large.
o
Campaign prospects: The
campaign’s chances of a win are very good. The measure was placed on the ballot
in a vote of 12-1 by the city council. In a very Democratic city, a motion to
endorse the IRV measure won 86% support at the city convention of the
Democratic party, while the measure has the support of the mayor and all
Democratic candidates this year for governor and secretary of state. The local
campaign has a detailed campaign plan and good volunteer energy, while a
supportive non-profit in the state (FairVote
Given the Republican
governor’s history of interest in IRV and widespread support among key
Democrats, a big win could trigger significant statewide interest in a state
with a history of multi-candidate elections.
·
[websites in formation at www.yesonprop3.net
/ www.wavoters.org]
o
What it is: To
take effect in the next county elections in 2008, this measure would eliminate
the county’s September primary system (one recently changed by unpopular
federal court rulings that force primary voters to pick one party’s ballot and
no longer have the opportunity to vote for candidates of different parties in
different races, as had been allowed for 70 years in the former “blanket
primary” system) and adopt instant runoff voting for nearly all county offices.
Parties would nominate one or more candidates for each office through private
means.
o
Campaign prospects:
Promising, but a significant challenge. The measure was placed on the ballot in
a pair of narrow votes of the elected charter commission, the first by 9-8 and
the second by 10-8 – a tie or loss in either of those votes would have killed
the measure. The county has a close partisan division, with Democrats often
winning about 55% in countywide elections and John Kerry defeating George Bush
in the county by 50% to 48% in 2004. A large, growing county with about 760,000
people,
A win would have immediate
statewide repercussions.
·
o
What it is: To
take effect in the next city elections in 2008 if the county auditor determines
the county is ready to run IRV elections, this measure would eliminate the
city’s current June elections and adopt instant runoff voting for all major
city offices in November. In
o
Campaign prospects: The
campaign’s chances of a win are good, if somewhat uncertain. On July 18 the
measure was placed on the ballot in a vote of 6-2 by the city council after a
relatively short-term effort to win support. The League of Women Voters has
endorsed the measure and been the lead voice in advocating the reform. The city
is very Democratic – in a recent survey of the 236 biggest cities in the
A win in
·
Other notable IRV opportunities in
2006-2007: FairVote’s IRV America program provides logistical and
educational support to people in a number of states and cities – support that
will soon be enhanced by new multi-media visuals explaining how ranked choice ballots
work and the merits of adopting IRV. Here is a short review of other states and
cities where significant advances are possible, if not likely.
o
Davis (CA) -- http://www.davischoicevoting.org/ Placed on the November ballot by a 3-2 vote
of the city council, this measure would recommend a ranked choice voting method
for city elections. If the city keeps at-large elections, that would mean a
proportional system. If the city moves to districts, that would mean IRV.
o
o
o
o
o
Future city campaigns in 2007-2008: Among
cities where there has been significant interest in IRV among elected officials
and key civic groups include: Denver (CO), where a November 2006 vote was
seriously considered before backers decided to wait until either 2007 or 2008;
Aspen (CO), where the city council looks poised to place IRV on the ballot as
soon as November 2006; Santa Fe (NM), where a March 2008 charter amendment
looks likely, in a state where IRV already has been debated seriously in the
legislature; San Diego (CA), where a task force is currently deliberating IRV
and should make a final recommendation in the fall; New York (NY), where the
current two-round runoff system for citywide primaries can cost the city up to
$20 million, yet experience plunging voter turnout; and Gainesville (FL), where
a charter commission this year expressed support for IRV and called on the
Florida legislature to pass a statute clarifying legality for cities..