California: Zany instant runoff race in San Francisco gives voters thousands of choices | Ventura County Star

The city that is home to the crookedest street in the world is this fall witnessing what surely could be the zaniest election in America. There are 16 people running for mayor and hardly a gadfly in the bunch. The field includes the current appointed mayor, two county supervisors, a state senator, the public defender, the city attorney, the assessor-recorder and three former supervisors.

Each is eligible for up to $900,000 in public financing, so none will be starved for campaign funds. Even those who find themselves dropping in the polls will be able to keep battling through Election Day.

When voters receive their ballots, they will have not one, not two, not even just 16 choices to make. Rather, under the instant-runoff voting system that is being used for the first time in a San Francisco mayoral election, they will have 3,360 distinct ways they could fill out their ballot.

Maine: Portland Prepares for Voting Experiment in Crowded Mayoral Race | MPBN

This November, Portland is undertaking a type of voting never tried in Maine before. Its next mayor will be chosen by a process by which voters rank their choices in the order of preference. But that could be quite the task for both the voters and the city officials preparing for the election, given a crowded field of candidates. It now stands at 19 with former state senator Ethan Strimling announcing his bid for mayor today.

… With a vigilant eye on the growing roster of candidates, the city is planning voter education workshops with the League of Women Voters ahead of the Nov. 8 election. And it's prepared to sign a contract this week with a DC-based election balloting company called True Ballot, which has experience with ranked-choice voting.

"We want to identify any of the possible pitfalls and avoid any kind of voter confusion on the day of the election," says city spokeswoman Nicole Clegg. Clegg says that if someone gets a simple majority of first choice votes--that'd be 50 percent plus 1 vote--the person wins.

Utah: GOP leader Nelson seeks election overhaul – recommends instant runoff voting | The Salt Lake Tribune

The vice chairman of Utah Republican Party wants state lawmakers to study an “instant runoff voting” system that he says could prevent third-party candidates from “spoiling” elections. Lowell Nelson told the Legislature’s Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee Wednesday that such systems allow voters to list their second choice among candidates, as well as their favorite.

If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who had supported that eliminated candidate would then have their “second-choice” votes given to remaining candidates to help one of them achieve a majority.

Utah GOP Chairman Thomas Wright said the state party has taken no position on instant runoff voting, and that Nelson is promoting that on his own. Nelson said Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, was interested in the idea, and asked him to make a presentation about it.

Minnesota: Ranked-voting system to debut in St. Paul City Council elections in November | TwinCities.com

In November, voters in the St. Paul City Council election will be able to choose up to six candidates per seat, ranked in order of preference. In other words, downtown residents could conceivably vote for all five candidates who have filed to run for office in Ward 2.

Nov. 8 will mark the city's first experience with the new "ranked voting" system, otherwise known as "instant run-off voting" or "ranked-choice voting," which was supported by voters in a ballot question last year. As a result, Ramsey County, which is contracted to coordinate the city's elections, is gearing up for significant changes from politics as usual, and candidates, too, have had to adjust.

For starters, the new system has eliminated political primaries. Votes are tallied on Election Day, and if no candidate has 50 percent of the vote plus one vote, the weakest vote-getter is dropped from the results.

California: San Francisco mayoral election to change shape as ranked-choice voting debuts | San Francisco Examiner

Gone are the days when voting was as simple as voting for the best person you most want to see serve. When voters head to the polls on Nov. 8, they will be asked to vote for not only who they want to win the most to serve as San Francisco’s mayor, but also their second and third choices.

For a chart detailing how ranked-choice voting played a role in Jean Quan's surprise Oakland mayoral election victory, click on the photo to the right.

This way of voting for San Francisco’s mayor has yet to be tested in a citywide race — this is the first time what is known as ranked-choice voting will come into play in the race for The City’s top post.

California: Appeals court upholds ranked-choice vote for San Francisco | San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco’s ranked-choice voting system is constitutional, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday in rejecting a challenge by a former candidate for supervisor.

Ron Dudum, a small-business owner who lost to now-disgraced former Supervisor Ed Jew in 2006, sued San Francisco election officials in federal court last year. He claimed that the city’s system violates the Constitution by denying thousands of voters a voice in elections and allows candidates to win without getting a majority.

Editorials: Carl Bialik: The Mathematical Debate Over Instant Runoff and Other Alternative Voting Systems | Wall Street Journal

My print column this week examines the debate over voting systems that theorists and reformers have backed to replace the system prevalent in the U.S. and many other places, in which each voter gets one vote and the candidate with the most votes wins. Among possible alternative systems include some where voters rank candidates and others where they assign candidates scores.

Instant runoff, the focus of my column, has gotten the most traction so far. But some mathematicians point out that the system could give rise to various troubling results. Two significant ones: Voters who decide to shift their support from one candidate to a second can hurt that second candidate; and voters can get a worse outcome if they choose to show up to the polls, inadvertently helping their least-favorite candidate (the no-show paradox). Robert Z. Norman, Dartmouth College professor emeritus of mathematics, has simulated three-candidate elections in which each candidate has at least 25% of support and finds that each of these apparent paradoxes occur about one in five times.

Editorials: Editorial: Mixed Member Proportional system deserves to survive referendum | NZ Herald News

The result of a British referendum on its electoral system shows how remarkable it was that New Zealand adopted MMP – and how much referendums are influenced by the mood of the moment. British voters have chosen to retain first past the post by 68 per cent to 32 per cent for a proposal called the Alternative Vote.

The result is devastating for electoral reform in Britain, burying the subject for another generation in the view of most commentators, and immediately devastating for Britain’s third party, the Liberal Democrats. The referendum was their main purpose in joining a coalition with the Conservatives.

Maine: New Voting System Debated in Maine Legislature | MPBN.net

Diane Russell’s goal is to enable Mainers to vote for their favorite gubernatorial candidate, rather than against their least favorite. “We want to make sure that the person elected to run our state shares the values of the vast majority of this state,” said Russell.

Her bill would enable voters to list candidates in order of preference – something that she feels would make the process more democratic if none of them get more than 50 percent of the vote, as often happens. In the case of no clear winner, a so-called “instant run-off” takes place, whereby the weakest candidate is eliminated, and his or her votes are re-distributed using the voters’ second choice candidates. This process continues until one of them has more than 50 percent of the vote. This system, she says, gives voters more choice, enabling them to go for the candidate they like the most rather than having to vote strategically.

United Kingdom: AV referendum: Yes campaign handed thumping defeat | The Guardian

Supporters and opponents alike have acknowledged that the alternative vote would never be introduced for Westminster elections after the proposal received a thumping defeat in the national referendum. With 439 of the 440 voting areas counted, the no campaign had established a lead of 68% to 32%, another wounding blow to Nick Clegg, whose Liberal Democrats had secured a referendum as one of their cherished prizes in negotiations with the Conservatives to form the coalition last year.

Matthew Elliott, campaign director of No to AV, said: “Tonight’s result is an emphatic victory, a clear signal from every part of the country that people want to keep our simple, fair and effective system for electing MPs. I believe this result settles the debate over changing our electoral system for another generation.”

United Kingdom: AV Referendum: Voters Deliver Comprehensive Defeat To The Yes Campaign | eGov monitor

After a long and twadry campaign on both sides where partisan politics and persoanlities took centre stage, the UK electorate has rejected the Alternative Vote (AV) system by a thumping majority of 67.9% to 32.1%. The final vote tallied at 6,152,607 voted Yes to the Alternative Vote, while 13,013,123 voted No, according to the official Electoral Commission announcement.  Only 10 areas in the UK including Islington, Camden, Hackney and Lambeth in London voted for the change to AV.

This hurts the Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg –  the referendum was the prize for joinining a coalition that would have to make tough decisions, hoping a Yes vote would change the political alignment of the country.  Instead, they got a crushing defeat and at the hands of the Prime Minister David Cameron. Mr. Cameron joined the campaign barely a month ago and in one month the polls went from favouring Yes to a massive win for the NO campaign.

Hawaii: Hawaii lawmakers table runoff-voting bill | Staradvertiser.com

A proposal to impose “instant runoff” voting in county elections has been tabled at the state Legislature this year. House and Senate members decided late Thursday night to defer the measure.

“We got some late information on the cost,” said Rep. Gil Keith-Agaran, the House Judiciary Chairman and lead negotiator on the bill. “I think we’d like to take this up during the interim and consider maybe bringing it back next year.”

Hawaii: Honolulu City Council: No Instant Runoff Voting | Honolulu Civil Beat –

Un-American, ill-advised and expensive. The Honolulu City Council has a long list of reasons as to why state lawmakers ought to kill a move meant to improve its current voting system.

Council members on Wednesday passed a resolution urging state lawmakers not to pass House Bill 638, which would bring instant runoff voting to Honolulu and other counties. The measure is two steps away from passing with state representatives set to discuss it in a conference committee Thursday morning.

Colorado: Fort Collins Colorado voters say no to ranked voting | The Coloradoan

Fort Collins voters are not interested in changing how the city runs its elections. Voters on Tuesday rejected a ballot proposal that would have had the city adopt a ranked-choice voting system in municipal elections designed to ensure that winning candidates enjoy the support of a majority of those casting ballots.

The proposal, which was endorsed by several local politicians and political organizations, fell well short of getting a majority of support, failing with 38.63 percent of voters in favor and 61.37 percent opposed.