San Francisco Bay Guardian
Making IRV reality
April 16, 2003
INSTANT-RUNOFF voting, which by law should be in place for San
Francisco's November election, is not only a crucial change in local
politics. It's an important national precedent, a chance for this city
to demonstrate to the rest of the country that an alternative (and
much better) way of running elections actually works. But the election
officials are dragging their feet on implementing procedures to ensure
IRV not only happens but also runs smoothly this fall.
The stakes are immense: if Elections Department director John Arntz
can't make IRV work, it will do more than screw up the mayoral
election. The reform will be dismissed nationwide as an ineffective
process, and years of important organizing work will go down the
drain.
The advantages of IRV are obvious: Instead of requiring millions of
dollars for a second, low-turnout runoff election that favors the
candidate with the most last-minute money, the contest is concluded in
one day. Candidates have an incentive to run positive campaigns, not
negative ones fueled by soft money. There's no longer a reason for two
progressive candidates to worry about splitting the vote and electing
a pro-downtown mayor. And the "spoiler" role for third-party
candidates vanishes: with IRV, Al Gore would have won Florida and the
presidency.
But city officials have been unable to reach agreement on a contract
with the software vendor that would write the computer code to make
this all happen with the city's current voting machines. That leaves
the prospect of a multimillion-dollar, weeks-long hand count. The
contract negotiations are taking place in secret, and IRV activists
can't figure out why the process is so gummed up.
The supervisors need to make this an immediate top priority. They
should hold emergency hearings and demand a public progress report on
the talks. This isn't rocket science, and San Francisco (of all
cities) should be able to find someone who can program the software
quickly. Time is running out.
|