Election Watch
June 3, 2003
From: Jon Golinger, Center for
Voting and Democracy Dear IRV supporters, We urgently need to get
letters and e-mails into Secretary of State Kevin Shelley���s office,
urging the Secretary of State to certify with all deliberate speed
the pending applications for counting the upcoming Ranked Choice
Voting election in San Francisco. Below are the main points for
your letters and e-mails, as well as a sample letter, addressed to
the Secretary of State. Please read it and modify it or send it as
is to the Secretary of State. BUT DO IT IMMEDIATELY. It is
imperative that we show the SOS, who oversees implementation, that
there is significant support for immediate implementation (also
contained in the letter is much valuable information that you will
find of interest). Also, try to get any organizations with which
you are affiliated to send a letter as well. Here is the contact info for the
Secretary of State. You can fax, mail, or email it. Faxing or
mailing is preferable (apparently the SOS's office is better at
processing letters that have been mailed or faxed, rather than
e-mailed. But I realize email is more convenient, and it that's all
you can do then that will work). If you email the letter, please
blind cc: [email protected]
, or forward a copy to that email
address. If you fax or mail it, please fax a copy to us at
415-665-5044. Fax number: 415-557-0169
Mailing address: Attention: Secretary of State, Elections
Division, 1500 11th Avenue, Sacramento, California 95814 E-mail:
[email protected] and [email protected]
(both places) Here are the main
points, followed by the sample letter. Make as many or as few of
these points as you wish. Let's make IRV happen! Please forward this
to your own email lists. Main points: 1) Please
expedite the certifying of both voting equipment and ���partial hand
count��� method for the ���ranked choice voting��� (also known as ���instant
runoff voting���) ballot counting procedure. 2) Unfortunately some in
San Francisco are attempting to "politicize" the implementation.
They believe killing IRV will help their preferred candidate for
mayor. But what is most important is to fulfill the ���will of the
voters.��� 3) Ranked choice voting is critically important for
empowering communities of color and minority voters of San
Francisco. There is strong evidence that ranked choice elections
have had a positive effect on communities of color and language
minorities in other places, including New York City, Ann Arbor,
Cincinnati, London, Australia, Cambridge, MA, and more. San
Francisco���s previous two-round (December) runoff system was
discriminatory of communities of color, since voter turnout declined
most among minority precincts and candidates were forced to raise
money for two elections, which is an additional disadvantage for
minority candidates. 4) San Francisco���s communities of color
strongly voted in favor of Proposition A to implement ranked choice
voting, including 69 percent support in Latino precincts, 62 percent
in African American precincts, and 55 percent in Asian American
precincts. 5) Ranked Choice Voting will get rid of an unnecessary
December runoff that was inconvenient for voters and cost millions
of tax dollars. The money it takes to implement ranked choice voting
costs far less than the cost of a second election. 6) The
Department of Elections actually has run a hand count before, for
the 1999 mayor���s race. Supervisor Tom Ammiano ran a write-in
campaign necessitating the hand-counting of tens of thousands of
ballots. That took over a week to finish, but the Department of
Elections handled the job with accuracy, transparency, and a high
degree of security. So if the voting equipment isn't ready, the
"partial hand count" is workable as a one-time solution until the
voting equipment is ready. 7) Even with the cost of a partial hand
count, it still will save the City over $2 million dollars in the
first year alone, since the cost of holding the second election in
December is about $4.5 million, but the estimated costs of the
partial hand count is less than half that amount. 8) With a partial
hand count, the mayoral election results still will be available a
month sooner than with a December runoff. 9) Other places in the
US, as well as entire nations like Australia and Ireland, have used
hand counts extensively to count their ballots for decades. If they
can do it, it���s doable for one election in San Francisco until the
voting equipment is ready. Here is the sample letter, which
expands on many of the points above. To: Secretary of State Kevin
Shelley 1500 11th Avenue, Sacramento, California 95814 Dear
Secretary of State Shelley, I am urging you to do your best to push
forward the certifying of voting equipment and procedures for the
���ranked choice voting��� (also known as ���instant runoff voting���)
ballot counting procedure to be used in San Francisco. Currently you
have two proposals before you, one to certify ES&S���s voting
equipment and the other to certify a ���partial hand count��� in case
the voting equipment isn���t ready. I urge you to certify both of
these as quickly as possible. Unfortunately there are some in San
Francisco who are attempting to "politicize" the implementation.
They believe killing IRV will help their preferred candidate for
mayor, and care not at all about fulfilling the ���will of the
voters.��� But ranked choice voting is critically important for
empowering communities of color and minority voters of San
Francisco, and for getting rid of an unnecessary December runoff
that was inconvenient for voters and cost millions of tax dollars.
San Francisco���s previous two-round (December) runoff system was
discriminatory of communities of color. Research by San Francisco
State University professor Rich DeLeon has demonstrated that, while
citywide voter turnout declined in most December runoff elections,
it declined even more among minority precincts. Communities of color
often do not have the financial resources to mobilize voters for two
back-to-back elections. Consequently, the final decisive election in
December has occurred when voter turnout in communities of color was
at its lowest. Also, the December runoff forced candidates to raise
money for two elections, often in a short period of time for the
second election, which was an additional disadvantage for minority
communities and candidates. Not only will RCV do away with the
discriminatory impacts of two-round runoff elections, but there is
strong evidence that ranked choice elections have had a positive
effect on communities of color and language minorities in other
places, including New York City, Ann Arbor, Cincinnati, London,
Australia, and more. Ranked Choice Voting elected a black mayor when
it was used in Ann Arbor, Michigan. A legal challenge to the system
by the losing Republican candidate was rejected by the Michigan
court, and ranked choice voting was upheld as constitutional and in
full compliance with ���one person, one vote.��� Moreover, ranked
ballots in New York City community school board elections have
HELPED racial and language minorities. In these elections, large
percentages of non-English speaking voters participated. As the
Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) has
documented, Asian American candidates achieved greater electoral
success in these elections than in any other elections in New York
City. The ranked ballots encouraged coalition-building and teamwork,
and helped minority communities to prevent split votes among their
own competing candidates. The U.S. Department of Justice in 1999
upheld the use of New York City���s ranked ballot elections, and Bill
Lann Lee, first Asian American director of the Civil Rights division
of the Justice Department, was personally involved in this decision.
For all these reasons, San Francisco���s communities of color
strongly voted in favor of Proposition A on March 5, 2002, which
implemented ranked choice voting for all major city offices. A study
showed that Latino precincts voted 69% in favor of Proposition A,
African American precincts 62%, and Asian American precincts 55%. In
fact, the only major demographic that voted against Proposition A
was white conservative precincts, which voted 42% in favor of Prop
A. Also Prop A was endorsed by leading minority groups and leaders,
including Chinese for Affirmative Action, Asian Pacific Democratic
Club, Asian Week, Latino Democratic Club, San Francisco Bay View
Newspaper, United Farm Workers, President of the Board of
Supervisors Matt Gonzalez, school board members Eric Mar and Mark
Sanchez, and more. I urge you to speedily certify both the vendor
ES&S��� application for certification to their voting equipment,
as well as the ���partial hand count��� for ranked choice voting put
forward by the Department of Elections. Some of the media are making
the partial hand count procedure sound like a nightmare, a
Frankenstein experiment that has never been done before. Yet the
Department of Elections actually ran a hand count for the 1999
mayor���s race! Supervisor Tom Ammiano ran a write-in campaign
necessitating the hand-counting of tens of thousands of ballots.
Ballots were sorted by precinct and by candidate, and each Ammiano
ballot had to be manually tallied. That process took over a week to
finish, but the Department of Elections handled the job with
accuracy, transparency, and a high degree of security. The Dept of
Elections has proposed the partial hand count as a one-time solution
in case the voting equipment isn���t ready for this November. I am
encouraged by the fact that 1) the Department has used a similar
hand count method before in the 1999 mayoral race; 2) even with the
cost of a partial hand count, it still will save the City a couple
of million dollars, since the cost of holding the second election in
December is about $4.5 million, but the estimated costs of the
partial hand count is less than half that amount; 3) the mayoral
election results still will be available a month sooner than with a
December runoff; and 4) other places in the US, as well as entire
nations like Australia and Ireland, have used hand counts
extensively to count their ballots for decades. If they can do it, I
think it���s doable for one election until the voting equipment is
ready, even while not preferable. In sum, there is strong evidence
from many places, both in the United States and abroad, that ranked
ballots and ranked choice voting have been advantageous to
communities of color and their candidates. And there is strong
evidence of the discriminatory impacts and voting rights
implications in the use of San Francisco���s previous two-round
(December) runoff system. It is simply untrue that there is any
evidence that ranked ballots are confusing for minority voters, or
will disenfranchise minority voters, or will diminish their ability
to participate in San Francisco's electoral process. It is
unfortunate that some in San Francisco are choosing to politicize
this implementation of IRV because they believe killing it will help
their preferred candidate for mayor. They care not at all about
fulfilling the ���will of the voters.��� But I believe that the partial
hand count procedure outlined by the Department of Elections is
workable for November if the voting equipment isn���t ready. In any
case, ranked choice voting should and must go forward. I urge you to
implement speedily the will of San Francisco voters, as well as the
law of San Francisco, which is to elect our local offices by ranked
choice voting. Sincerely, |