Senate Approves 'Instant Runoffs'A wide-ranging election bill approved by the Senate on Wednesday will
allow up to 20 counties and cities to try "instant runoffs" as a way to
avoid costly and poorly attended runoff elections.
The measure also would increase the time between primary elections and runoffs from four weeks to seven weeks. State elections officials have said they need more time to canvass primary votes and mail out or send absentee ballots for overseas and military voters for those elections.
The instant runoff program would allow voters in local elections to rank their order of preference among the candidates listed. Election officials initially would tally only the first choices. If the leading candidate fails to win more than 40 percent of the first-choice votes, the top two candidates would advance to the runoff.
Election officials would then examine the ballots of voters whose preferred candidate was eliminated. The remaining candidates would get votes for being the highest-ranked alternative choice. Those votes would be added to their original tally and the candidate with the most total votes would win.
Instant runoffs already are used in other states as well as in San Francisco, said Sen. Dan Clodfelter, D-Mecklenburg, who called them a way to eliminate the costs of holding runoffs, which generally have low turnout rates.
Studies of instant runoffs show a drop in the percentage of voters who make second or third choices, but "more people actually participate in the second round under the (instant runoff) system than the way that we currently use," Clodfelter said.
Others worried that instant runoffs may change campaign strategies.
"This method of voting would lead to a very odd and radical way to think when you go to the polls," Sen. Doug Berger, D-Franklin. "This appears that this is an idea from San Francisco and I say we should leave it in San Francisco."
The measure also would cut the candidate filing period for partisan municipal elections in half to two weeks.
The bill now returns to the House, which approved a version of the instant runoff bill last year.
The measure also would increase the time between primary elections and runoffs from four weeks to seven weeks. State elections officials have said they need more time to canvass primary votes and mail out or send absentee ballots for overseas and military voters for those elections.
The instant runoff program would allow voters in local elections to rank their order of preference among the candidates listed. Election officials initially would tally only the first choices. If the leading candidate fails to win more than 40 percent of the first-choice votes, the top two candidates would advance to the runoff.
Election officials would then examine the ballots of voters whose preferred candidate was eliminated. The remaining candidates would get votes for being the highest-ranked alternative choice. Those votes would be added to their original tally and the candidate with the most total votes would win.
Instant runoffs already are used in other states as well as in San Francisco, said Sen. Dan Clodfelter, D-Mecklenburg, who called them a way to eliminate the costs of holding runoffs, which generally have low turnout rates.
Studies of instant runoffs show a drop in the percentage of voters who make second or third choices, but "more people actually participate in the second round under the (instant runoff) system than the way that we currently use," Clodfelter said.
Others worried that instant runoffs may change campaign strategies.
"This method of voting would lead to a very odd and radical way to think when you go to the polls," Sen. Doug Berger, D-Franklin. "This appears that this is an idea from San Francisco and I say we should leave it in San Francisco."
The measure also would cut the candidate filing period for partisan municipal elections in half to two weeks.
The bill now returns to the House, which approved a version of the instant runoff bill last year.
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.