E-News UpdateApril 6, 2001
To: Friends of Fair Elections
Fr: Rob Richie, Executive Director, Center for
Voting and Democracy, www.FairVote.org
Re:
We have also joined with a range of other civic groups to study and advocate improvements to our electoral process -- a process so clearly exposed as lacking in last year's elections. Recommendations will begin with new voting equipment and methods of voter education, but are certain to explore more fully the significance of the franchise and how to increase voter participation. We believe that as long as citizens keep pressing for reform, we can make important advances, both at a federal and state level. See our new Christian Science Monitor commentary today at www.csmonitor.com for our analysis of reform opportunities and to see how much is under consideration in states, peruse the National Conference of State Legislators' database on electoral reform legislation. Activists and grassroots reformers
are also mobilizing around ambitious reform agendas that prominently
highlight proportional representation and instant runoff voting.
There will be a major pro-democracy conference in Philadelphia on
June 29 - July 1st -- with several workshops on voting system reform
and a town hall meeting with our president John Anderson. We have
organized four regional conferences this year that have cumulatively
drawn more than 350 people (see a description of the most recent
workshop below) and are co-sponsors of a May 4th New York City event
on proportional representation. We also have generated steady media
coverage. New articles by our staff and board have appeared this
year in numerous publications, including the American Prospect,
Tompaine.com, the Southern Regional Council's "Voting Rights Review"
and the Progressive magazine, while longer pieces will be in
Harvard's Asian American Policy Review and a new book "Challenges to
Equality: Poverty and Race in America" (ME Sharpe, April 2001). CVD
advisory board members have new books that are remarkable
contributions to informed debate about election systems: Douglas
Amy's "Behind the Ballot Box: A Citizen's Guide to Voting Systems"
(Praeger, 2000) and Kathleen Barber's "A Right to Representation:
Proportional Election Systems for the 21st Century" (Ohio State
University Press) -- both are available in paperback and essential
additions to the bookshelves of election system reformers and
scholars. Perhaps just as importantly, more
people with no association with our Center are advocating voting
system reform. New articles linked from our website include powerful
pieces by Jim Cullen, Lani Guinier, Jim Hightower and Miles Rapoport
and newspaper editorials strongly in favor of instant runoff voting
from USA Today, St. Petersburg Times and Trenton Times.
There are important new reports on
our site as well, including ones on diversity (and lack thereof) in
state and federal legislatures and on competitiveness and turnout
(and yes, lack thereof!) in congressional elections. Find out if
your state is among the five (only one with more than three seats)
where more than half of House seats were not won by landslide
victory margins - and how it ranks in voter turnout, accuracy of how
votes translated into seats, representation of women, representation
of people of color and more. See if your House Member was among the
235 that we predicted would win by a landslide -- only one of whom
fell short (winning instead by a mere 18% margin). And don't forget
our state-by-state guide to redistricting as we head full-tilt into
this often brutal battle for power -- one that in winner-take-all
elections determines the representation most voters are going to
have at any given level of election for the next decade.
Please feel encouraged to share this
e-newsletter with others. To receive frequent postings about news
around the country and world, please subscribe to cvdclips by
sending a message to mailto:[email protected].
Contact national field director Dan Johnson-Weinberger at [email protected] to
see if there is a listserv in your area. Instant runoff voting
legislation in 12 states and Congress
A 1997 bill in Texas was the first
state legislation in decades -- as far as we know -- to propose
instant runoff voting. It would have made it an option for local
elections. By 1999, legislation to enact instant runoff voting for
most state and federal offices passed one house of the New Mexico
legislature and similar legislation was subject of hearings in
Vermont and Alaska. This year, a dozen states have bills
on instant runoff voting (IRV), and hearings on these bills have
been held in several states. Washington's IRV bill -- one that would
enact IRV for most major offices in the state -- has passed one
senate committee and come tantalizingly close in another, where it
remains alive due to great grassroots work by Brent White, Nat
Holder and Krist Novoselic. California's powerful speaker of the
house has introduced legislation to adopt IRV to fill state
legislative and federal vacancy elections. New Mexico legislation
lost in a narrow floor vote in the house, while Vermont's bill is
co-sponsored by a third of the senate and has the support of state
branches of PIRG, Common Cause, the Grange and League of Women
Voters. Already qualified for the November 2002 statewide ballot,
IRV advocates in Alaska are now fully focused on the ballot measure.
There are federal bills on instant runoff
voting: HR 57, a bill with 45 co-sponsors, that would establish a
commission to consider a full range of electoral reforms, including
instant runoff voting and proportional representation, and HR 1189,
the Voters' Choice Act, which would express a sense of Congress that
states should adopt instant runoff voting to allocate electoral
votes in the presidential race. Expect more federal; legislation on
instant runoff voting this spring, and track pending
legislation
.
Proportional voting
legislation in states and Congress
The Voters' Choice Act (HR 1189), versions of which have been introduced in each congressional session by Rep. Cynthia McKinney since 1995, would allow states to use proportional voting methods by amending the 1967 law that required the US House to be elected from single member districts. See new commentaries about proportional representation by Rep. McKinney and by Rep. James Clyburn. Like HR 57 (referenced above), the
Congress 2004 Commission Act (HR 506) also would study proportional
representation, but with a more narrow focus. It would create a
commission to analyze the size of Congress (after changing every
decade since its formation, House size was set at the current 435
level in 1910) and how it is elected -- specifically citing
proportional representation and cumulative voting.
Georgia considered legislation on
cumulative voting and choice voting, while in Alabama, HB 660 would
allow cumulative voting in certain elections including members of
the county commission, board of education, or municipal governing
bodies. In Illinois, there is bipartisan support for a
constitutional amendment that would restore cumulative voting in
three-member districts to the Illinois House. HJR 4 would replace
the current 118 single-member district system with 39 districts of
three members each, elected by cumulative voting (see www.fairvote.org/op_eds/Ill.htm
for recent news article on the bill). This would allow the
political minority in each part of the state to be represented in
Springfield, not just the political majority. Visit fairvote.org/reports/1999/index.html
to track legislation about voting system reform.
City efforts likely to lead to
ballot measures in 2001
In the wake of a unanimous
recommendation by a charter commission in January 2000, the city
council in Austin, Texas is considering placing instant runoff
voting for city council races on the ballot later this year. A
part-time CVD consultant is building support for this potential
campaign, while CVD is tracking other city activism that could lead
to ballot measures to implement instant runoff voting or
proportional systems -- expect at least one or two votes this year.
*
Pro-democracy conference June 29-July 1 in Philadelphia A broad range of groups, including
our Center, have joined together to organize a major conference in
Philadelphia June 29 - July: "The Pro-Democracy Convention Shaping
the Future of Democracy in America. After two plenary sessions,
attenders will attend three rounds of workshops on aspects of the
"Voters' Bill of Rights," which includes instant runoff voting and
proportional representation (to read the full set of planks, see www.ippn.org/ProDemocracy-Main.htm).
Look for more information about this important event soon, but if
you're looking for a chance to plug into reform work, save the date
on your calendar. To track the conference and other pro-democracy
events, visit http://www.ips-dc.org/electoral,
an excellent new web resource from the Institute for Policy Studies
and the Nation magazine.
May 4 event on proportional
representation in New York
The Independent Politics Group at
the City University of New York Graduate Center and CVD will hold an
event on the evening of May 4th on "Proportional Representation in
New York City: Looking Back, Looking Forward." The choice voting
method of PR was used for five elections during the city's "golden
age" under Mayor LaGuardia, and a growing number of political
players in the city would like to see it restored. More details will
be released on our website shortly.
Electoral reform movement gathering strength As touched on in describing the Philadelphia
and New York events, there is important new grassroots activism for
reform -- energy that only promises to build with more campaigns,
more gatherings like a "democracy
institute" planned for students
and more community eduction initiatives. Working on the inside, our Center is
involved with four different coalitions and sets of task forces
organized by the Constitution Project, Demos, League of Women Voters
and the National Coalition for Black Civic Participation. With the
broad range of people involved in these and other similar efforts,
we are confident that reform recommendations about voting mechanics,
voter education and voter participation will be developed that will
be very influential with Congress, states and localities. Even if
these improvements in voting mechanics do not directly address
proportional representation and instant runoff voting, they are
essential building blocks for reformers-not only to protect and
enhance the right to vote, but to lead to new voting equipment that
can handle better ranked-choice methods like instant runoff voting
that cannot be conducted on outmoded machines like punchcards.
One particularly important insider initiative
is the National Commission
on Election Reform, organized earlier this year by the
University of Virginia's Miller Center of Public Affairs and the
Century Foundation. Chaired by former presidents Jimmy Carter and
Gerald Ford, the commission held the first of four public hearings
on election reform on March 26th in Atlanta, Georgia. It focused on
voting mechanics, but did hear testimony from Alex Keyssar, a Duke
professor and author of the highly recommended book "The Right to
Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in America," about
proportional representation and instant runoff voting.
The commission is soliciting public comment. Media coverage: Important new articles,
books, television
Browse through the amazing array of news coverage on election system
reform from recent months.
And don't forget the new books by Douglas Amy (Behind the Ballot
Box) and Kathleen Barber (The Right to Representation) described
above. CVD president John Anderson was a
guest on C-SPAN's Washington Journal program on, April 1st, where he
talked about proportional representation and instant runoff voting
(John is celebrating his 80th year with typical energy and
inspiration -- speaking at our four regional conferences, appearing
on at least three additional panels to debate the Electoral College,
writing new articles and still balancing his other hats with the
World Federalists and Public Campaign.) My comments likely will be
featured in an upcoming CNN News story on the state of the electoral
reform debate on "Inside Politics" and recently appeared on CNN's
"Talkback Live" and on NBC Evening News to discuss electoral reform.
(We believe that movement toward reform has great momentum, even if
going more slowly than some anticipated. It is not a question of
whether we will modernize and improve voting processes and voter
education, but to what degree.) New CVD web reports on diversity,
competitiveness
For several years the Center has
produced reports on competition and voter turnout in congressional
races. This series, tagged "Dubious Democracy," has been updated to
include results from the 2000 elections, which stand among the least
competitive in decades. See state-by-state statistics and state
rankings at: fairvote.org/reports/1999/index.html. See
how well we did in our congressional
predictions
.
We also have produced a new report
on representation of women, political parties and racial and ethnic
minorities in state and federal legislatures at: fairvote.org/vra/index.html#data.
The Center regularly produces such reports on elections and election
systems. Other recent reports on our web include:
Pro Rep movements gathering
steam in Canada and UK
The proportional representation movement in the
United Kingdom, centered around the British Electoral Reform
Society,
has been active for more than a century. Recent successes include
adoption of proportional representation for assembly elections in
Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and London and for elections to
the European Parliament. Current focuses include efforts to win the
choice voting method of proportional representation for municipal
elections in Scotland -- recommended now by two commissions -- and,
of course, elections to the big British prize, the House of Commons.
After winning nearly two-thirds of seats with barely two-fifths of
the vote, Tony Blair's Labour government backed away from a pledge
to hold a national referendum to adopt a proportional system for the
House of Commons elections, but recently has indicated that a
referendum remains possible for the next parliament -- much may
depend on the size of the likely Labour majority in elections likely
to take place later this year. Meanwhile, Canada's remarkable distortions and
regional imbalance in national and provincial elections has made it
ripe for reform. Fair Vote Canada, a national citizens' campaign to
change Canada's voting system, has been officially launched at a
"Making Votes Count" conference in Ottawa last weekend. A
citizen-based, non-partisan campaign involving people from all parts
of the political spectrum and all regions of the country, Fair Vote Canada (FVC) is
mounting a nation-wide educational campaign. See
information at one of the most active branches <www.fairvotingbc.com>.
Another conference will take place
in Ottawa on May 2-3: "Votes and Seats: Opportunities and Challenges
for Electoral Reform in Canada," organized by the Institute for
Research on Public Policy. Registration details and the conference
program are posted at: http://www.irpp.org/events/archive/050201e.htm
Getting active: Equipment, demo
elections and legislation
Below is a the report on our recent Los Angeles conference by Casey Peters, one of the conference's organizers and a founding member -- it provides a small window into reform energy in many states. In addition to boosting legislation and any ballot measures in your area, we urge you to write your county and state legislators to ask them to make sure that any new voting equipment in your county and state has the capacity to handle all voting methods now used in the United States, including ranked-choice systems and cumulative voting. We also want to urge people to consider holding demonstration elections in their area -- and for those fed up with political insiders ignoring the public interest in redistricting, consider a simple demonstration... or at least a good letter to your editor about how proportional voting systems are the best way to allow voters to pick their representatives rather than the other way around. To find out how to get active in your area, please contact our national field director, Dan Johnson-Weinberger, at [email protected] and visit our activist website page. We also have internships available,
both in our national office outside Washington, DC and in field
offices in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Chicago.
Casey Peters on "Los Angeles
Regional Conference on Reform": Over 120 people gathered at Loyola
Law School on Saturday, March 24 to explore possible changes in
American elections. The event was videotaped for broadcast by
Adelphi Communications... The first panelist to speak was Los
Angeles County registrar Conny McCormack, who related her
experiences (noting that while well acquainted with hanging chads,
had never heard of dimpled or pregnant chads until after Election
2000). She expressed an openness to accommodating new elections
systems to bring better representation to the voters of Los Angeles
County. Next, John Anderson spoke about how we need to go beyond
replacing unreliable voting machines and look at instant runoff
voting and proportional representation. His eloquence and wit
enlivened both the audience and the rest of the panel. State
Assembly Member Robert Pacheco, a Republican, spoke about the
difficulties of being in a minority party in the legislature, but
promoted his bills for electoral reform. Next, L.A. County
Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky was sharply critical of the role of the
commercial media in distorting fair elections. Finally, Mark
Ridley-Thomas reiterated the argument that African-Americans had
been excluded in the 2000 elections. Many people raised questions
from the floor before the televised session ended....
USA Today editorial in favor of
instant runoff voting
Below is from one of the best new
articles and commentaries on our website. It ran in USA Today on
February 5, 2001 "Spoiler-free elections"
Life isn't very happy these days for
the ''spoilers'' from November's elections. As reported by USA TODAY last week,
Democrats in Congress are shunning their old consumer-advocate
comrade in arms, Ralph Nader, because he siphoned off enough voters
to cost Al Gore the election. If just a fraction of Nader backers in
Florida and New Hampshire had gone for Gore, he would have won both
states, and a majority of the Electoral College.
While not widely reported, GOP
renegade Patrick Buchanan played a similar role. Bush lost New
Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin and Oregon by margins so small that
Buchanan's votes could have given him victory. If Bush hadn't eked
out a court-ordered edge in Florida, Republicans would be denouncing
Buchanan just as Democrats do Nader. Clearly, both parties have a stake
in changing the system -- ideally without making it harder for
third-party and independent candidates to get on the ballot.
Some states, notably in the South,
already require runoffs between the top two candidates if no one
gets 50% of the vote in a primary or election for state office. Many
other countries elect presidents that way. Thus whoever wins can
legitimately claim to have majority support. But second campaigns
are expensive and would result in even more special-interest money
tainting the process. Two California cities, Oakland and
San Leandro, just adopted a better way for local elections, called
''instant runoff voting.'' Under it, voters rank the candidates 1,
2, 3 in order of preference. Voters thus could support both a Nader
and a Gore, both a Buchanan and a Bush, or any other combination.
If a candidate wins a majority of
first-preference votes, the count is over and that candidate wins.
If not, the last-place finisher is eliminated. Ballots cast for that
candidate are counted for voters' next choice, until someone has a
clear majority. Australia and Ireland have used the system for
decades..... DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEMS
Instant runoff voting: Voting system
in which winners must be acceptable to at least half of voters and
in which non-major candidates are not dismissed as "spoilers."
Voters can rank candidates in order of their choice rather than be
restricted to voting for only one. Proportional voting systems: Voting
systems in which groupings of like-minded voters win representation
in proportion to their share of the vote. If 20% of voters seek a
certain kind of representation, they will win one out of five seats.
If 51% want another kind of representation, they should win three
seats. In short, a majority earns its right to decide, but political
minorities earn their right to representation.
Visit our website for more
information: fairvote.org
E-mail updates from prior months are archived |