Election-day guinea pigsSAN FRANCISCO VOTERS are about to play guinea pig. On Nov. 2, the city
goes to an instant-runoff system to sort through 65 candidates for the
winners of seven seats on the Board of Supervisors.
It's a major shift that allows voters to rank three preferences for office. Though it has worked in smaller races, the system is untested at the big-city level.
But the instant-runoff system also offers cost savings and convenience because it cancels the need for a weeks-later runoff. The new method has even injected decorum into one close and crowded district race.
In the seven supervisorial races, voters will be asked to mark three choices in their district according to preference. After the first-choice votes are counted, a candidate would need to get a majority to win outright.
But if no one candidate gets above 50 percent of the vote, the instant- runoff mechanism clicks in. Beginning with the last-place finisher and moving up the standings, the second-place choices are added to the first-place numbers until one candidate with more than 50 percent of the vote emerges. Once the ballots are in hand, this work can be done in minutes, backers claim.
The process takes some getting used to. Voters approved the idea in March 2002, but it has taken two years to get the software and testing done.
The system will be anything but instant. City elections chief Jim Arntz says it may take two weeks after election day for a close race to be decided. That's because late-arriving absentee ballots and provisional (questioned) ballots need to be examined by hand. Arntz adds that this wait would occur under the old system as well.
But there are at least two potential advantages to the new approach:
First, the need for a second runoff, usually a month later in December, will be canceled. And, because voter turnout in December can be half of a November showing, more voters will take part in choosing a winner.
Second, a strange side-effect is already at work, at least among the crowd of 22 candidates running in the Haight-Western Addition district. At debates and forums, many contenders praise rivals, even suggesting which ones voters should pick as second or third picks. Big and not-so-big candidates hold get-togethers to knit alliances. Expedience has engendered civility.
There's still room for doubt. San Francisco has famously stumbled in simpler elections. Ballot-box lids were found floating in the bay. Long waits for results were the norm. But the last few elections were trouble-free, by comparison. Results were tallied promptly and no serious challenges heard.
This improved performance will be tested by the instant-runoff plan. The city should do everything it can to instruct voters: extra education, more poll workers and clear instructions. Then, it must be ready on election night. It will be a challenge..Note: A step-by-step explanation of how the instant-runoff system works can be found at sfelections.org.
It's a major shift that allows voters to rank three preferences for office. Though it has worked in smaller races, the system is untested at the big-city level.
But the instant-runoff system also offers cost savings and convenience because it cancels the need for a weeks-later runoff. The new method has even injected decorum into one close and crowded district race.
In the seven supervisorial races, voters will be asked to mark three choices in their district according to preference. After the first-choice votes are counted, a candidate would need to get a majority to win outright.
But if no one candidate gets above 50 percent of the vote, the instant- runoff mechanism clicks in. Beginning with the last-place finisher and moving up the standings, the second-place choices are added to the first-place numbers until one candidate with more than 50 percent of the vote emerges. Once the ballots are in hand, this work can be done in minutes, backers claim.
The process takes some getting used to. Voters approved the idea in March 2002, but it has taken two years to get the software and testing done.
The system will be anything but instant. City elections chief Jim Arntz says it may take two weeks after election day for a close race to be decided. That's because late-arriving absentee ballots and provisional (questioned) ballots need to be examined by hand. Arntz adds that this wait would occur under the old system as well.
But there are at least two potential advantages to the new approach:
First, the need for a second runoff, usually a month later in December, will be canceled. And, because voter turnout in December can be half of a November showing, more voters will take part in choosing a winner.
Second, a strange side-effect is already at work, at least among the crowd of 22 candidates running in the Haight-Western Addition district. At debates and forums, many contenders praise rivals, even suggesting which ones voters should pick as second or third picks. Big and not-so-big candidates hold get-togethers to knit alliances. Expedience has engendered civility.
There's still room for doubt. San Francisco has famously stumbled in simpler elections. Ballot-box lids were found floating in the bay. Long waits for results were the norm. But the last few elections were trouble-free, by comparison. Results were tallied promptly and no serious challenges heard.
This improved performance will be tested by the instant-runoff plan. The city should do everything it can to instruct voters: extra education, more poll workers and clear instructions. Then, it must be ready on election night. It will be a challenge..Note: A step-by-step explanation of how the instant-runoff system works can be found at sfelections.org.
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.