All the scare talk about instant runoff voting turned out to be just that -- scare talk.
After the Legislature authorized the new process for North Carolina, Hendersonville on Nov. 6 became the second city to use the instant runoff process.
An exit poll of voters showed that they found the process easy to follow and that they preferred it to voting in separate elections.
North Carolina State University's Dr. Michael Cobb, assistant professor of political science, designed the exit poll to gauge voters' reaction to instant runoff voting.
The exit poll included interviews with more than 800 voters from Hendersonville.
The exit poll found that 71 percent of voters preferred instant runoff voting. Almost nine out of 10 voters said the ballot was at least "somewhat easy to understand" and three out of five said it was "very easy" to understand.
The findings confirmed a theory we've long held: Voters aren't stupid.
The new process seemed like a common-sense way to save the voters' time and the taxpayers' money. How often does that happen?
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.