Instant Runoff Voting: A Great Idea Whose Time Has Come

by Joe Pulcinella

I first heard about Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) years ago but thought it made way too much sense to be adopted by any major municipality let alone a national election. But San Franscisco just used it to comply with their mandate that elected officials get into office with a majority, not just a plurality.

In last November's election, San Francisco used instant runoff voting for local races. Two exit polls showed that city voters liked their new system and found it easy to use, including the city's many non-English speaking minorities. Previously, San Francisco decided majority winners in December runoffs. Citywide runoffs cost on average about $3 million, and voter turnout plummeted by as much as 40 percent in recent years. Candidates also had to raise more money for the runoff, and independent expenditures tended to soar.

The Christian Science Monitor article goes on to say that the suppposed "confusion" never materialized and that voters liked the idea much better than going back to the poles for a re-run.

If politicians are truly interested in finding the true intent of voters as they claimed in 2000, IRV is the most efficient and fair way to do that. My own informal polls have indicated that people vote defensively in national elections because they fear that so much is at stake. The way we do it now, there is no way to make your intent known. After all, what if John Kerry had been elected? Did everyone really want George Bush? Anyway, the article is very optimistic about a widening of IRV.

Legislative bills for instant runoffs were introduced in 22 states in the past two years, with states poised for real action in 2005.

The topic has drawn bipartisan support from Republicans such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Democrats such as Howard Dean, the new chairman of the Democratic National Party and former Vermont governor. Ballot measures supporting IRV passed by 2-to-1 margins in all three cities where it was on the ballot in 2004: Ferndale, Mich.; Burlington, Vt.; and Berkeley, Calif. Places like Australia and Ireland already have been using instant runoffs for decades to elect their highest offices.

And all this time I was under the impression that John McCain was against giving third-parties a fighting chance of holding major office? Who woulda thunk it?

Comments

There are some thoughtful critiques of IRV (and some not so thoughtful), but non I am aware of say it even approaches being as undemocratic as what we have now.

Post a Repsonse

Name:
Comment: