CVD homepage
What's new?
Online library
Order materials
Get involved!
About CVD

St. Petersburg Times

Understanding the instant runoff
By Martin Dyckman 
June 8, 2003

More bad news from Tallahassee: They're going to go without runoff primaries yet again next year. If Bob Graham, who's running for president, doesn't seek re-election to his U.S. Senate seat, a dozen or more people may make the race. A runoff is the only insurance against the extreme wings of the major parties controlling the nominations, which would leave more than 6-million voters with utterly dismal choices in November.

The excuse this time is the same as in 2002: Florida's costly new voting systems may count votes more accurately, but they take longer to prepare.

The supervisors of elections do make a compelling case that they can't do it right with only four-week intervals between a primary, a runoff and a general election. That problem could be overcome, however, by holding the first primary before Labor Day rather than after, but the Legislature is not exactly wild about voting in August.

Why not try an instant runoff? It ought to be easy to manage with all those new computers and optical scanners, and would cost far less than a conventional runoff without imposing any significant extra demands on the supervisors.

Some legislators are interested in this option, but the leaders who could make it happen say it's too arcane for the public.

That's a dodge. Instant runoff voting is no more complex than saying what flavor of ice cream you want if they happen to be out of chocolate. Instant runoffs are used to elect the Australian House of Representatives, the mayor of London, the president of Ireland, and in hundreds of other public and corporate situations. The voter simply marks a second choice at the same time as the first. What is there about it that's so hard for Florida legislators to understand?

top of page

The Center for Voting and Democracy
6930 Carroll Ave,  Suite 610, Takoma Park, MD 20912
(301) 270-4616        [email protected]