Oakland to vote to eliminate midyear primariesBy Christopher Heredia
Published July 19th 2006
OAKLAND -- Oakland voters in November will determine whether to do away
with midyear primaries and move to a system of ranking their picks for
local elected offices, the City Council decided Tuesday.
The council, by a vote of 7-2, adopted a proposal to ask voters whether they want to switch to ranked-choice voting, also known as instant-runoff voting, which proponents say increases voter participation in elections, but which opponents say is too confusing and could lead to fewer people casting votes.
Several other cities, including San Francisco and Berkeley, have adopting ranked-choice voting.
Ranked-choice voting allows voters to pick their top three choices, in order of preference, for any race.
If no one gets more than 50 percent of the vote, the candidate with the fewest first-place votes is dropped from the list, the second-choice candidates on those ballots are moved to the top spot and the ballots are recounted. The process continues until someone has a majority of the vote.
Proponents say instant-runoff voting helps increase voter turnout, especially in minority communities whose members show up at the polls in greater numbers in fall elections. Advocates say it also reduces candidates' need to raise money, thus allowing them to focus on issues in a campaign.
Council members Larry Reid and Henry Chang opposed switching to ranked-choice voting. Critics say the ranked-choice process can confuse voters who speak limited English.
E-mail Christopher Heredia at [email protected].
The council, by a vote of 7-2, adopted a proposal to ask voters whether they want to switch to ranked-choice voting, also known as instant-runoff voting, which proponents say increases voter participation in elections, but which opponents say is too confusing and could lead to fewer people casting votes.
Several other cities, including San Francisco and Berkeley, have adopting ranked-choice voting.
Ranked-choice voting allows voters to pick their top three choices, in order of preference, for any race.
If no one gets more than 50 percent of the vote, the candidate with the fewest first-place votes is dropped from the list, the second-choice candidates on those ballots are moved to the top spot and the ballots are recounted. The process continues until someone has a majority of the vote.
Proponents say instant-runoff voting helps increase voter turnout, especially in minority communities whose members show up at the polls in greater numbers in fall elections. Advocates say it also reduces candidates' need to raise money, thus allowing them to focus on issues in a campaign.
Council members Larry Reid and Henry Chang opposed switching to ranked-choice voting. Critics say the ranked-choice process can confuse voters who speak limited English.
E-mail Christopher Heredia at [email protected].
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers. Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections; the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.