Editorials: How to save money and reduce rancor in campaigns | Krist Novoselic/Salon.com

While Bill de Blasio’s win in the Democratic contest for mayor was the big story out of New York on election day earlier this month, there were other national implications: one of our greatest cities showcased why it’s time to leave 19th century democracy behind. Election officials had to haul old lever machines out of storage, with highly predictable troubles involving broken machines and frustrated voters. In an equally outdated voting rule, voters could only indicate support for one candidate in each race, rather than rank them in order of preference — meaning that instead of a primary winner being determined on election day, there now needs to be an additional run-off election held in the city a few weeks later. When you can only choose one person in a multi-candidate field, the candidate with the most votes can earn well under 50 percent. (On Tuesday, Boston had a mayoral race in which the top vote-getter had just 18 percent; that city will have a runoff between the top two finishers.)

New York: High-Cost Runoff for Public Advocate’s Post Prompts Calls for Reform | New York Times

The numbers are attention-getting: on Tuesday, New York City will spend about $13 million to hold a runoff in the Democratic primary for an office, public advocate, that is budgeted only $2.3 million a year. And the combination of a little-known post with a little-understood election process is expected to lead to startlingly low turnout — maybe 100,000 to 175,000 voters, in a city of 8 million people. Yet the election is likely to determine the occupant of one of the city’s top offices, because there is no Republican candidate. The high cost of an election for a low-cost office has inspired wags to muse. Some have suggested that the race be decided by a coin toss. Others, including the Republican nominee for mayor, Joseph J. Lhota, have joked that, because the public advocate has few concrete powers, the two candidates could be allowed to serve, at a saving to taxpayers. But some elected officials and government reform advocates have suggested a longer-term solution: instead of holding costly, low-turnout runoffs, New York City should switch to instant runoff voting, a system already used in other cities.

Australia: What is preferential voting? | SBS World News

Preferential voting is required in Australia. It’s largely unique to our political scene, reflecting the number and diversity of smaller parties that participate in elections. It is a system of voting that allows a citizen to individually number and rank all candidates for both houses of parliament according to their preferences. It is employed when no one candidate or party wins outright, based on first preference votes. It means a citizen’s vote can still be counted, even if their first choice of candidate is eliminated due to a lack of votes. On a ballot paper, placing a number one against a candidate is considered the first preference or primary vote. If no candidate secures an absolute majority of primary votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is then eliminated from the count.

Maine: Run-Off Elections, Ranked Choice Bills Fail in Legislature | Rockland Free Press

In recent years, support has surfaced for run-off elections in Maine. Under such a system, the winning candidate would be required to receive a majority of the votes rather than a plurality. For instance, in three out of the past five gubernatorial elections, the winner was elected with less than 40 percent of the vote due to the increased presence of third-party and independent candidates. In 2010, candidates Libby Mitchell and Eliot Cutler split the moderate and liberal vote down the middle, resulting in a win, with 38 percent of the vote, by the ultra-conservative Paul LePage. This session a number of bills were submitted that would have implemented a form of run-off elections. Rep. Jeff Evangelos (I-Friendship) submitted a bill that would have required another election to be held if no candidate received over 50 percent of the vote. Under that two-round system, the two candidates with the most votes would be on the ballot for a second election. The Maine Secretary of State’s office testified neither for nor against the bill, but stated that holding a second election would pose a significant difficulty for the state and municipalities as the schedule for tabulation and recording the official vote tally would leave insufficient time.

Minnesota: Ranked Choice Voting looms large as Minneapolis Democrats fail to endorse mayoral candidate | Twin Cities Daily Planet

A contentious, 12-hour convention Saturday failed to endorse a DFL candidate for Mayor of Minneapolis, increasing the significance of the role that Ranked Choice Voting will play in the November 5 election and giving a crowded field of candidates more room for maneuver. More than 1,400 delegates attended the all-day convention which — like all but one of the previous three such events — did not succeed at giving the party’s endorsement to one candidate. The convention dissipated in confusion after four ballots when supporters of progressive candidate Betsy Hodges left the Minneapolis Convention Center, joined by supporters of fellow progressive candidate Gary Schiff. Schiff had withdrawn his name from contention after the second ballot and urged his supporters to join forces with Hodges. The joint tactics by the two City Council members were aimed at blocking an endorsement for former Hennepin County Commissioner Mark Andrew, who was the favorite of many “old-guard” DFLers and came the closest to winning the 60-percent support necessary for endorsement.

Minnesota: Minneapolis voting: More poll workers, better voter education planned | MPRN

City elections officials want to make this fall’s election go more smoothly than in past years. Plans announced on Wednesday focus on shortening wait times at Minneapolis polling places, increasing voter education efforts and reducing the amount of time it will take to count the cast ballots. Last November, in a presidential election year, voters faced long lines at several city polling places. Some voters waited in line only to find out they were in the wrong place after some precinct boundaries were redrawn. More poll workers this fall will be assigned to each site, Assistant city clerk Grace Wachlarowicz said. She said the presence of additional staff will give judges more time to concentrate on their primary duties. “This will give them an opportunity to focus strictly on poll management, assist voters where they need to, answer questions, manage the lines. That will be their sole responsibility — is management,” Wachlarowicz said.

New York: Bill Introduced To Move City To Instant Runoff Voting | New York Daily News

The city’s runoff elections would be scrapped in favor of instant runoff voting under a bill being introduced Wednesday in the City Council. Backers say the new automatic system could avoid the trouble that’s been sparked by the difficulty of holding a primary and runoff two weeks apart with electronic voting machines – and save $20 million every election cycle the city spends on runoffs. They also say it would be more democratic because turnout is typically tiny for runoff elections, much smaller than for primaries. “This whole debate would all be unnecessary if we simply had instant runoff voting. We would save money, we would save time, we would save headaches,” said Councilman Brad Lander (D-Brooklyn), who is sponsoring the bill along with Councilwoman Gale Brewer. “This would enable more people to participate in the runoff.”

Canada: Toronto Councillors vote to seek end of ‘first past the post’ system in city elections | National Post

Toronto city council took a significant step on Tuesday towards dramatically changing how the city elects its leaders — and who gets to cast a ballot. By a vote of 26 to 15, the governing body asked the provincial government to allow it to use the ranked choice voting system, which demands that the winning candidate accumulate at least 50% of votes cast. It also asked, by a margin of 21 to 20, the minister of municipal affairs and housing to grant permanent residents the right to vote in municipal elections. Both initiatives require Queen’s Park to amend legislation. Yanni Dagonas, a spokesperson for Minister Linda Jeffrey, said the government will give Toronto’s requests “careful consideration” and said it appreciated the city’s efforts to “increase voter engagement.” City staff have already indicated it would be impossible to implement such reforms by the 2014 election. Ranked choice voting would also have to come back to city council for further approvals.

Canada: Toronto Council votes to explore ranked balloting, voting for permanent residents | Globalnews.ca

Toronto’s city council voted to explore ranked balloting and let permanent residents vote during a council debate Tuesday. The votes were part of a larger motion on electoral reform that included suggestions to establish weekend elections and internet voting. Changes to municipal elections would require legislative changes by the Ontario government. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing issued a short statement Tuesday evening saying the Ontario government “will take the time to give careful consideration” to the proposal and appreciates the city’s “efforts to look at ways to increase voter engagement.”

Minnesota: Some Council members getting cold feet over proposed Minneapolis ranked-choice changes | MinnPost

Changes to election laws are almost always explained by saying the new rules will give voters more opportunities to participate. The flip side of the new rules, especially those made by a group of candidates during an election year, might be seen as giving those running for office a few extra opportunities of their own. That’s the crux of the discussion involving the Minneapolis City Council, where some of the members want to give voters the chance to rank more than three candidates for each office in the fall election. And several council members are questioning the ethics of candidates making changes to the election laws. “I think it’s almost to the point of making me feel uncomfortable, and it’s distasteful that we are voting on a ballot we are going to be on,” said Council Member Lisa Goodman at Thursday’s meeting.

Minnesota: Tweaking ranked-choice voting: Minneapolis considering three changes | MinnPost

Members of the Minneapolis City Council got scolded by a member of the Charter Commission as they prepared to change some of the rules on how ranked-choice voting will be administered in this fall’s election. “I would submit that 13 declared candidates for office, in an election year, five months prior to an election, have no business changing election laws,” said Devin Rice of the Charter Commission. He also was critical of an earlier council decision to reduce funds available for voter education, given the incidence of voter error in the 2009 election. Errors in using ranked-choice voting showed up on 6.5 percent of ballots cast, Rice said.

Maine: Bill to create Maine presidential primary, adopt ranked-choice voting comes with hefty price tag | Bangor Daily News

Maine would replace party caucuses with a nonpartisan presidential primary and elect its governor, legislators and federal officials with ranked-choice voting under a system proposed Monday in the Legislature. The multimillion-dollar cost of implementing the bill could prove to be its biggest challenge, given the state’s financial situation, according to the state’s election chief. Rep. Deane Rykerson, D-Kittery, who introduced LD 1422 to the Legislature’s Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee on Monday, said that his proposal would eliminate the state’s caucusing and party-by-party primary system in favor of a single primary election in which candidates would have the option of declaring their party membership or not. Rykerson said the system would prompt more voters to cast ballots based on the candidate and not his or her political party.

Minnesota: Minneapolis ranked-choice voting could give independent candidates a new way to attract voters | MinnPost

Few would bet against a DFLer winning the Minneapolis mayor’s race in November. But with ranked-choice voting, the odds have improved some for independent candidate Cam Winton, who has referred to himself as a moderate Republican and whose platform pushes such conservative policies as improving the business climate and the efficiency of city services. The city’s ranked-choice voting uses a nonpartisan ballot ranking that allows a voter to choose a first, second, and third preference for mayor. As Community Voices contributor Jeffrey Peterson explained on MinnPost last month: “In a single-seat election, if no candidate receives a majority (50 percent plus one) of first choices, the least popular candidate is eliminated and his or her ballots get reallocated to remaining candidates based on their voters’ next choices. This process continues until one candidate earns a majority of support.”

Minnesota: Minneapolis’ mayoral race puts test to ranked-choice voting system | Minnesota Public Radio News

Voters will have several choices to consider in this year’s mayoral election. So far, seven people have declared they are running for mayor in the most hotly contested race Minneapolis has seen in decades. Just as it did four years ago, Minneapolis will use ranked-choice voting to decide the winner. The November election is expected to draw far more voters and put the system to the test. Election judge Nasra Noor showed a voter how to use a ranked-choice ballot in 2009. It was the city’s first election using the new system, which is also called instant-runoff voting. It allows voters to choose up to three candidates for each office and rank them first, second and third. But not many people voted. Fewer than 46,000 ballots were cast that year. It was the lowest general election turnout the city had seen in decades — about half of what is normal for Minneapolis municipal elections.

Maine: Sponsors agree on one bill for ranked-choice voting in Maine | The Forecaster

Two legislators have joined forces to support a single bill to establish ranked-choice voting in Maine. The election-law bill submitted by Sen. Dick Woodbury, U-Yarmouth, is now co-sponsored by Rep. Janice Cooper, D-Yarmouth, who submitted similar draft legislation at the beginning of the year. Woodbury said the bill has generated notable public interest. “I think the fact that the next govorner’s race is shaping up to have Eliot Cutler as a prominent independent is increasing people’s interest in making sure there is some kind of narrowing down of the system, so that the ultimate winner of that race has the majority support of the people,” he said.

Maine: Legislators push statewide ranked-choice voting | Sun Journal

So long, spoilers.That’s the message two Yarmouth legislators hope to send with legislation aimed at eliminating the chances of electing statewide candidates with less than a majority vote. Freshman Rep. Janice Cooper, D-Yarmouth, and veteran legislator Sen. Dick Woodbury, U-Yarmouth, have submitted draft legislation for ranked-choice voting to the Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee. “Today, there are more third-party and unenrolled candidates, and the current system doesn’t work well when there’s a broader range,” Woodbury said. “I think that it tends to give an advantage to candidates that are more at the party extremes, and are less moderate, which can lead to candidates winning with less than 50 percent of the support from voters.”

Maine: Yarmouth legislators push statewide ranked-choice voting | The Forecaster

So long, spoilers. That’s the message two Yarmouth legislators hope to send with legislation aimed at eliminating the chances of electing statewide candidates with less than a majority vote. Freshman Rep. Janice Cooper, D-Yarmouth, and veteran legislator Sen. Dick Woodbury, U-Yarmouth, have submitted draft legislation for ranked-choice voting to the Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee. “Today, there are more third-party and unenrolled candidates, and the current system doesn’t work well when there’s a broader range,” Woodbury said. “I think that it tends to give an advantage to candidates that are more at the party extremes, and are less moderate, which can lead to candidates winning with less than 50 percent of the support from voters.”

Maryland: Takoma Park utilizes instant runoff voting for the first time | Gazette.Net

Takoma Park’s instant runoff voting system was put to the test for the first time July 17 for the Ward 5 special election. The city instituted the system in 2006, but this year marks the first election where three or more candidates did not earn a majority of the vote. Of the 189 votes cast in the election, winner Jarrett Smith received 97 votes and runner-up Eric Hensal garnered 80 votes. Third-place finisher Melinda Ulloa received 33 votes, 13 of which went to Smith in the second round and nine to Hensal. In the instant runoff voting system, voters have the option to rank their first, second and third choice candidates. When no candidate receives at least 50 percent of the votes, second-choice votes for backers of the third-place finisher are added to the first- and second-place finishers.

California: In two Bay Area cities, critics tackle ranked-choice voting | California Watch

In the past 10 years, four California cities have embraced ranked-choice voting, the system of computerized runoff elections that boosters say streamlines and reforms local politics. Almost as soon as the new systems were in place, critics began trying to roll ranked-choice voting back. Opponents are ready to go back at it this week. Tomorrow officials in San Francisco are scheduled to consider measures that would modify the new high-tech voting system. The Oakland City Council was asked to consider a measure tomorrow that would have abolished rank-choice voting entirely in that city. But Mayor Jean Quan blocked it from coming before the council, said Terry Reilly, a former San Jose election official and a ranked-choice voting opponent.  In a ranked-choice election, voters get three weighted choices for each office on the ballot. If no candidate wins 50 percent of the first-choice votes, a computerized “instant runoff” is held to select the winner.

California: De La Fuente pushes for vote on Oakland’s election system | Inside Bay Area

This November will be Oakland’s second election using ranked-choice voting, but if Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente gets his way, it could be the last. De La Fuente wants council members next week to place an initiative on the November ballot asking voters to rescind the voting system and return to holding runoff elections when no candidate wins an absolute majority. But De La Fuente doesn’t appear to have the votes to get the measure on the ballot, and he likely won’t even be able to keep the proposal on the council’s agenda. Ranked-choice elections ask voters to rank their top three candidates. When no candidate wins more than half of the first-place votes, the second- and third-place votes are tabulated, avoiding the need for runoff elections.

California: San Francisco ranked choice voting repeal effort gets tricky with three alternatives | San Francisco Bay Guardian

The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote on July 10 whether to place a controversial charter amendment on November’s ballot that would largely repeal San Francisco’s ranked-choice voting (RCV) system, but the outcome of that effort has become murky with the introduction of two competing alternatives. The original charter amendment, sponsored by Sup. Mark Farrell, would eliminate RCV for all citywide elected officials, instead holding a primary in September and runoff in November. The board rejected an earlier effort by Farrell to repeal RCV, but Farrell came back with a modified measure that was co-sponsored by Sup. Christina Olague, much to the dismay of her progressive supporters, particularly Steven Hill, the father of RCV in San Francisco. Hill said runoff elections in September, a month notorious for having low-voter turnout, will invariably favor the conservatives who always vote in high numbers. He said that RCV is a fairer representation of what voters want and a November election allows for more voters to be heard.

California: Oakland Ranked-Choice Voting Repeal Blocked | East Bay Express

It looks as if the effort to repeal ranked-choice voting in Oakland has unraveled already. A group with close ties to ex-state Senator Don Perata’s campaign manager admitted to the Oakland Tribune that it won’t be able to gather the 20,000 signatures needed to qualify its proposal for the November ballot. And an alternative plan by Oakland Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, a longtime close friend and ally of Perata’s, to ask the city council to place the measure directly on the ballot does not have the necessary votes. De La Fuente, who plans to run for mayor this fall if there’s a recall election, has been a longtime opponent of ranked-choice voting, also known as instant-runoff voting. He worked with Perata in 2010 in an attempt to block Oakland from using it, even though 69 percent of city voters had approved the voting system. Perata later blamed ranked-choice voting for his loss in the 2010 mayor’s race to Jean Quan. Perata received more first-place votes than Quan did, but she garnered far more seconds and thirds, enabling her to win.

California: Oakland rethinks ranked-choice voting, term limits | San Francisco Chronicle

Oakland voters may get a chance to weigh in on the city’s use of ranked-choice voting and the number of terms council members can serve. Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente wants to see a November ballot measure that asks voters to repeal ranked-choice voting in city elections, while Councilwoman Jane Brunner wants voters to consider limiting the terms of City Council members and the city attorney to three four-year terms. Currently there are no term limits. The proposals would require a majority council vote to get on the fall ballot. The council is expected to vote on them in mid-May.

California: San Francisco Supervisors tangle over whether to kill or change ranked-choice elections this year | SF Public Press

Earlier this year, the Board of Supervisors wrestled with changing the way the city elects mayors, district representatives and other officials. Two proposals would give San Francisco voters a choice: expand the instant – runoff voting system, in use since 2004, or return to a general election with a possible later top two runoff. On Feb. 14, the Board of Supervisors tabled Supervisor Mark Farrell’s proposal to repeal ranked-choice voting on a 6-5 vote. At the same meeting, Supervisor David Campos’ measure to amend the system was sent back to the Rules Committee on a unanimous vote. On March 6, Farrell introduced a modified proposal that would abolish ranked-choice voting in all citywide races, except for district supervisors. Both measures could see a vote on the November 2012 ballot.   Why does this matter? Opponents of ranked-choice say the relatively novel approach still confuses voters. Opponents of the two-election approach say it wastes money.

California: San Francisco Ranked Choice Voting may face November challenge | ktvu.com

Voters could decide this November on a charter amendment introduced Tuesday at the San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ meeting that would eliminate ranked-choice voting for all citywide elections. Supervisor Mark Farrell introduced the proposal, which he says has the support of five other supervisors, enough to place it on the ballot in November. San Francisco’s current system allows voters to rank up to three candidates for each elected office, and those with the lowest vote totals are eliminated and their second- and third-place votes are reassigned until someone has the majority of the votes. The charter amendment would scuttle ranked-choice voting and replace it with a non-partisan primary in September of any election year with citywide races. If no candidate received 65 percent of the vote for a given office, a runoff would be held in November between the top two candidates.

Editorials: Ranked-Choice Ballot Upholds Voter Rights | Richie and Gronke/Roll Call

Once Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman dropped out of the Republican presidential nomination contest, their South Carolina and Florida backers who cast ballots early, including many military voters living overseas, essentially wasted their votes. They voted for candidates who didn’t want their support. Florida and South Carolina voters are not alone. Several upcoming primary states allow “no excuse required” absentee voting, meaning a far higher percentage of votes are now cast early. More than a quarter of Florida’s 400,000 absentee ballots had already been returned before Perry and Huntsman withdrew, and in 2008 nearly two-thirds of all Tennessee ballots were cast early. If you add in other states, more than a million voters have received ballots with the names of Perry, Huntsman and fellow candidate dropouts Herman Cain and Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.). Although many “early voters” cast ballots close to Election Day, that option isn’t available to service personnel whose ballot may need to traverse 10,000 miles.

California: Supervisors Considering Changes to San Francisco’s Election System | The Bay Citizen

Two dueling ballot measures to change San Francisco’s election system will go in front of the city’s Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. San Francisco’s current ranked-choice voting system allows voters to rank up to three candidates for each elected office, and those with the lowest vote totals are eliminated and their second- and third-place votes are reassigned until someone has a majority of the votes. But the two charter amendments being considered by the board to put on the June ballot are proposing to either overhaul the current system or make small tweaks and keep ranked-choice voting in the city.

California: Analysis Finds Incorrect Use of Ranked-Choice Voting | NYTimes.com

The results are in: San Francisco voters have trouble with ranked-choice elections. Despite a $300,000 educational campaign leading up to last month’s elections, including a new smiley-face mascot, publicity events, and advertising on buses and in newspapers, only one-third of voters on Nov. 8 filled out all three choices in all three races, according to an analysis released this week by the University of San Francisco.

Under the city’s system, voters were asked to rank their top three choices for mayor, sheriff and district attorney. Perhaps the analysis’ most troubling finding is that 9 percent of voters, mostly in Chinatown and southeastern neighborhoods like the Bayview, marked only one choice for each office, either because they considered only one candidate suitable or because they did not know how to fill out their ballot correctly.

Maine: Does ranked choice voting have a future in Maine? | Bangor Daily News

Before the final vote tabulations were made, a Southern California man emailed the Bangor Daily News with a prediction about the Portland mayoral race from afar. Terry Reilly, an outspoken nationwide critic of Portland’s newly implemented ranked choice voting system, predicted the winner would end up with about 8,000 votes from the nearly 20,000 ballots cast in the mayoral race. Less than a majority.

The use of ranked choice voting is under fire in Reilly’s state, specifically in San Francisco, with an opposition group working to put a repeal question before voters as early as next year. There, voter turnout waned and campaigning reportedly turned negative this fall. Opponents say ranked choice voting hasn’t delivered on what its supporters promised when it was installed about seven years ago.

California: Supporters seek ‘tweaks’ in ranked-choice voting | SFGate.com

For all those San Franciscans outraged that they could only mark their three top choices in last month’s election for mayor, help is on the way. A proposed charter amendment by Supervisor David Campos clears the way for voters to rank five, 10, 20 or more candidates in upcoming ranked-choice elections.

Campos’ measure, which is designed to counter a proposed June ballot measure by supervisors Mark Farrell and Sean Elsbernd that would end ranked-choice voting in the city, calls for any new voting equipment to allow ranking of more than the current three choices, up to the total number of candidates.

If that happens, the city might want to add chairs to the voting booths, since the mayor’s race featured 16 candidates and ranking them all might take awhile. Then there was last year’s District 10 race out in the Bayview, where 21 hopefuls appeared on the ballot. Try ranking that crew in order of preference.