Instant runoff voting (IRV) is a new way of electing
a single winner among a field of three or more candidates. Instead of
allowing a candidate to win a race without the majority of the votes...
IRV requires voters to vote for every candidate by ranking them (1 being the highest, 2 being your second choice, and so on).
IRV mandates a runoff wins by at least 50 percent in the first round.
If no candidate receives the majority then the candidate with the lowest number of No. 1 votes is eliminated and that candidates' second-choice votes are counted in a runoff. If there is still no candidate with at least 50 percent of the vote, the candidate with the lowest number of votes during the second round is eliminated and this process continues until one of the candidates gains the majority of the vote.
Arguments made for IRV
It encourages positive issue-based campaigns. Negative campaigning would be significantly reduced because candidates will know that they may have to obtain the second and third choice votes of voters supporting other candidates in order to be elected.
It allows more third party candidates to be on the ballot because people will not be "wasting" their vote instead their second and third place votes will be counted eventually as well.
It saves money because the runoffs that are usually held after the initial voting day are all taken care of on election day.
It decreases the number of people splitting their votes for different, yet similar candidates thus allowing one to win with only a minority of the vote.
More voters will be encouraged to go to the polls to vote because each and every vote matters (if your first choice candidate is defeated, your second choice candidates vote will count in the second round).
Who uses it?
IRV is currently being used in Ireland for its presidential election, Australia to elect its House of Representatives, and the American Political Science Association to elect its president, in Cambridge (Mass.) they use a variant of IRV to elect their city council, and many other companies and student governments utilize IRV for their election process.
IRV requires voters to vote for every candidate by ranking them (1 being the highest, 2 being your second choice, and so on).
IRV mandates a runoff wins by at least 50 percent in the first round.
If no candidate receives the majority then the candidate with the lowest number of No. 1 votes is eliminated and that candidates' second-choice votes are counted in a runoff. If there is still no candidate with at least 50 percent of the vote, the candidate with the lowest number of votes during the second round is eliminated and this process continues until one of the candidates gains the majority of the vote.
Arguments made for IRV
It encourages positive issue-based campaigns. Negative campaigning would be significantly reduced because candidates will know that they may have to obtain the second and third choice votes of voters supporting other candidates in order to be elected.
It allows more third party candidates to be on the ballot because people will not be "wasting" their vote instead their second and third place votes will be counted eventually as well.
It saves money because the runoffs that are usually held after the initial voting day are all taken care of on election day.
It decreases the number of people splitting their votes for different, yet similar candidates thus allowing one to win with only a minority of the vote.
More voters will be encouraged to go to the polls to vote because each and every vote matters (if your first choice candidate is defeated, your second choice candidates vote will count in the second round).
Who uses it?
IRV is currently being used in Ireland for its presidential election, Australia to elect its House of Representatives, and the American Political Science Association to elect its president, in Cambridge (Mass.) they use a variant of IRV to elect their city council, and many other companies and student governments utilize IRV for their election process.
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.