Papua New Guinea is a nation of about five million people near Australia. In 2002 its government moved to adopt instant runoff voting (which it calls"limited preferential voting", as voters are limited to three choices) for its legislative elections. The system was seen as a way to encourage representatives to reach beyond their base, as plurality election had been resulting in candidates winning with low plurality votes, often under 25%.

The new system was used in a special election in December 2003 and, as has so often been the case, worked very well. The winner nearly won on the first count, but did fall short of a majority and won on the second count. One key point from an American perspective was that the percentage of spoiled ballots was under 2% --  less than the percentage of spoiled ballots nationally in our presidential election in 2000.  As has been shown in many conditions, ranked-choice systems are not difficult for voters -- indeed the voter error rate is consistently about 0.5% in Ireland's presidential elections.

Below are representative articles about the initial election:

ABC Radio Australia: "PNG voting system praised by new MP." December 24, 2003.

The National:"Yes, there is a Doctor in the House." December 18, 2003.

GoAsiaPacific.com: "PNG adopts new voting system for by-election." December 4, 2003.

ABC Asia Pacific:"Optimism over new voting system in PNG." December 12, 2003.

The National:"Trawen heartened by low number of informal votes." December 17, 2003.

The National: "Dr Temu scores decisive victory." December 17, 2003.

In June, the Arkansas State Election Improvement Study Commission released a report recommending various changes in election law in Arkansas. Secretary of State Sharon Priest, the commission chair and former president of the National Association of Secretaries of State, filed a minority report in which she recommended the adoption of instant runoff voting for judicial elections.

Her recommendation apparently had been introduced too late to be debated fully by the commission (Ms. Priest prefaces her minority report with "The following recommendations represent areas the study commission either did not address or left incomplete."). But instant runoff voting certainly makes eminent sense given that the commission recommended moving judicial elections to November, with a late-November runoff if there were no majority winner. With this schedule, turnout likely would plunge in the decisive round of voting. The Center has found that turnout nearly always drops in major runoff elections in the United States; for example, from 1994 to 2000, there were 70 federal primary runoffs, and turnout dropped in 68 of them. The average turnout drop in these 70 races was more than 30%.

The full Arkansas report is available online  in pdf format. Below is the relevant section on instant runoff voting.

Additional Findings and Recommendations
By Secretary of State Sharon Priest

The biggest challenge for Arkansas is consistency county-by county in the administration of election law. The following recommendation s represent areas the study commission either did not address or left incomplete.

My recommendations are:

1. Creation of a State Election Board

2. Uniform Early Voting Dates and Hours of Operation

3. Instant Run-off for Non-Partisan Judicial Elections

4. Participation in Federal Voting Assistance Program's Pilot Project

...3. Instant Run-Off for Non-Partisan Judicial Elections

The Arkansas State Election Improvement Study Commission recommended moving the Non-Partisan Judicial General Election to coincide with November General Election. To further complement this move, I recommend the implementation of instant run-offs for judicial candidates.

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) is a simple voting method used to select a single winner from a list of two or more candidates. By collecting /more meaningful information from voters, it gives them a greater power of choice and measures their will more accurately. This process was invented in the United States and has been used in Australia and Ireland for many decades.

Under Instant Runoff Voting, instead of choosing just one candidate voters rank the candidates. For voters it is simple to understand, they just pick a first choice, a second choice, a third choice, and so on. These rankings are used to simulate a series of runoff elections, in which the last-place candidates are eliminated one by one. Each time a candidate is eliminated, the people who voted for him/her have their vote go to their next-choice candidate. Eventually someone gets a majority.

In general, instant run-off counting proceeds in the following manner: First by counting all votes. If a candidate receives a majority of votes he or she is elected. If no candidate receives a majority on the first or any subsequent stage then the last-place candidate at each stage is eliminated. The next choices on ballots for an eliminated candidate become votes for the candidates indicated in those choices and that process continues until all but one candidate has been eliminated.

This innovative voting option ensures majority rule, boosts voter turnout (low turnout for runoff elections), and makes your vote count. As for voting systems, most electronic systems currently in use have IRV-compatible equipment and paper ballots are commonly used for this method of voting (overseas).

On May 11, 2002, the Utah Republican Party nominated a candidate for US Representative and narrowed two large fields to two candidates who will appear on the primary election ballot on June 25, 2002.  Please scroll down for more information about these elections or check out the election results.

We believe this is the first use of instant runoff voting to nominate congressional candidates in over 70 years in the United States.

The Deseret News reported on the decision to use instant runoff voting for nominations and pointed out the beneficial impact this was having on campaign debate.

With 10 candidates for CD-1 and 12 in CD-2, the previous method of voting -- multiple ballots -- would have taken the 3,500 delegates literally hours to determine their nominees or primary candidates.  See below for more details about the ballot counting, which was done by hand and which apparently went smoothly, as well as results in the three races.  There were no exhausted ballots in the race with 3 candidates, and only 1% in the races with 10 and 12 candidates.

Utah GOP Elects to Use Instant Runoff Voting to Nominate Congressional Candidates

March 2002

On February 2, 2002, the Utah Republican Party adopted bylaws to use instant runoff voting to nominate candidates for US Congress at the May 11, 2002 state convention.  The 3,500 delegates will vote on nominations for Utah’s 3 Congressional seats.  The convention uses a 60% threshold for nomination, and if no candidate receives 60% in the instant runoff tally, the top two candidates square off in a primary election in June.

In addition, at least 4 counties -- Summit, Box Elder, Cache and Sevier -- will have used instant runoff voting for nominations at county conventions by May of this year.

This follows last year’s successful use of instant runoff voting to elect state party officers in August 2001 and to nominate a county commission at the Summit County Republican Party convention in April 2000.  We believe the Summit County nomination was the first public nomination using instant runoff voting by a major party in decades.

The motivation for using instant runoff voting in party conventions is simple.  With multiple candidates, under Robert’s Rules, there are essentially three options:  election by plurality, multiple balloting or instant runoff voting.  Robert’s Rules frowns on plurality voting because it can violate majority rule.  Multiple balloting in a large convention can take hours to conduct.  This can lead to large voter drop off and cause meetings to stretch until late at night.  Instant runoff voting combines the advantages of both:  election by a majority or higher threshold in a single election.

The use of instant runoff voting had particular value in this year’s Congressional nominations.  There are between 3 and 12 Republican candidates in the three races.  Instant runoff voting efficiently nominates a strong standard bearer or selects the two top candidates to appear in a primary election.  Without instant runoff voting, the delegates who happen to have the endurance to stay through the final rounds of balloting could decide such nominations.

For more information about these races, see a Salt Lake Tribune article along with a list of candidates.

For more information about the use of instant runoff voting in Utah, please contact Mike Ridgway, one of the principal advocates for instant runoff voting in the Utah Republican Party, by email or phone at 801-220-0166.

Results of the IRV nomination are now available.