Two initiatives are circulating in Maine on election law topics. Maine Citizens for Clean Elections is virtually finished circulating an initiative that would (1) fully fund the public funding program; (2) require disclosure of top donors who make independent expenditures; (3) require disclosure of fundraising for transition and inaugural committees. This initiative has been circulating since May 2014. If it is submitted in January 2015, the vote on it will be on November 3, 2015.
The other initiative would establish ranked-choice voting for all federal and state offices except President. It has only been circulating for a month but seems likely to be finished in January 2015. However, if the sponsors choose not to submit the signatures that early, the initiative would be on the ballot in November 2016 instead of November 2015.
I’m not totally against Ranked Choice. I just know it will take about 100 years before we witness it as the common practice in electing our Congress, Legislatures, County Commissioners, and City Councils.
But the better question is, will we still have a republic in the United States – if the United States is still around 100 years from now.
IRV as being promoted by FairVote.org, and most likely the initiative being promoted in Maine, is a rather poor idea. That’s because the two-party system is cemented into place by raising the threshold to a guaranteed 50% (plus one vote) minimum for elections which the largest political party will likely win in a majority of cases.
If good reforms of current US-style elections were ranked where #1 is the best reform (pure proportional representation), I would rank Top Two as a #10 and IRV as a #9.
The 9th USA Parliament has been using pure American proportional representation for 19 consecutive years and it works great!
http://www.usparliament.org
To clarify, IRV (instant runoff voting) is a catch-phrase which generally applies to single-winner elections and which does use ranked choice voting (RCV).
When RCV is applied to multi-winner elections, then we get the threshold lowered for each additional seat proportionately and in large sets of seats such as in an assembly, then RCV in the at-large district will elect a pure proportional representation assembly and raise the total guaranteed voter satisfaction level proportionately for each additional seat.
Examples:
IRV for one winner = 50% candidate threshold
RCV for three-members = 25% candidate threshold
RCV for five-members = 16.6% candidate threshold
RCV for twelve-members = 8.33% candidate threshold
RCV for 100-members = .99% candidate threshold
Etc., etc
As you can see, the more people per district, the more the threshold gets elected for each candidate to win a seat.
One-winner elections don’t create a team psychology, only two or more do that, and the Hagnebach-Bischoff method only uses two or more seats while most ranked choice systems being promoted presently as in SF and Oakland by FairVote.org are for single-winner elections.
Guaranteed Voter Satisfaction Levels (GVSL)
IRV for one winner = 50% candidate threshold
GVSL = 50%
RCV for three-members = 25% candidate threshold
GVSL = 3 x 25% = 75%
RCV for five-members = 16.6% candidate threshold
GVSL = 5 x 16.6% = 83%
RCV for twelve-members = 8.33% candidate threshold
GVSL = 12 x 8.33% = 99.96%
RCV for 100-members = .99% candidate threshold
GVSL = 100 x .99% = 99%
The Fairvote math MORONS are brain dead EVIL about 3 choices math —
34 L–M–R
33 R–M–L
16 M–L–R
16 M–R–L
99
With IRV, M loses.
L beats R 50-49
M has a mere 99 of 99 votes in 1st and 2nd place.
Head to Head math –
M beats L 65-34
M beats R 66-33
i.e. IRV/RCV WILL ELECT more and more Stalin and Hitler clones (just as in top 2 primaries — and even the old plurality winner primaries) —
who WILL claim a mighty *mandate* from Hell to do whatever.
See Hitler in 1933-1945.
Means nothing to the EVIL IRV F-A-N-A-T-I-C-S from political Hell.
—–
Thus pending some MAJOR education about head to head math (aka Condorcet math) —
P.R. and App.V.
I have been pushing for pure proportional representation (PR) since I first heard about it in 1992 from my neighbor Mike Ossipoff [Peace & Freedom], an outsider mathematician, who has been ridiculed by FairVote ever since then.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the comedy.
Looking back 32 years I see a lot of clowns out there running around in circles when all we ever needed is a short shovel pass or fly route to the in zone.
Fortunately, today is the first day of the rest of our lives so there may be hope.
If we keep our nose to the grindstone and just do our jobs, even a team of clowns may eventually get it right if they’re professionals.
…well, 22 years, that is. 🙂