Both sides have now filed briefs in the Maine Supreme Court on whether the initiative passed by Maine voters last year, for instant runoff voting, conforms to the State Constitution. See this story.
Both sides have now filed briefs in the Maine Supreme Court on whether the initiative passed by Maine voters last year, for instant runoff voting, conforms to the State Constitution. See this story.
Instant runoff voting (IRV) is no good, because the top winner is required to win by 50% (plus one vote), thus perpetuating a one-party monopoly.
All single-winner elections are no good, because they attract egomaniacal power-grabbing psychopaths that are so typical in all USA-style plurality elections.
If you want to see unity, teamwork, inclusion and solutions for the whole, you may be interested in pure proportional representation (PR).
The 10th USA Parliament has been using pure proportional representation for more than 22 consecutive years and it works fine.
Now there is the new International Parliament:
http://www.international-parliament.org/
Nobody has it as good as the worldwide United Coalition:
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
The article links to the briefs.
The advocates seem to be arguing that the People acting as a legislative body have plenary authority to define what a “vote” is.
Under current system:
A: Did you vote?
B: Yes.
Under proposed system:
A: Did you vote?
B: I’m not sure.
A: What do you mean?
B: Well I went to my polling place …
A: The Elks Lodge?
B: Yeah, same place where I voted in the past.
A: And …
B: Well I signed the poll book, and marked my ballot, and dropped it into the ballot box …
A: So you voted!
B: Not so quick. Under instant pudding voting, or whatever it’s called, my ballot paper might be discarded and not counted.
A: Well that doesn’t mean that you didn’t vote, it just means that your vote might not count. It’s just like in the past if you didn’t mark a race, or marked two candidates, or had scrawled across your ballot “Down With Potatoes”, or your ballot was otherwise defective or deficient.
B: I don’t understand.
A: Of course not, you have common sense. Let me try again. Your vote might be deemed exhausted.
B: I’m exhausted? I get eight hours of sleep, take my vitamins, and …
A: You’re fine, in fact you’re better than fine. It is your ballot that was exhausted and discarded before it could become a vote.
B: My ballot was discarded?
A: Don’t worry it’s just a book entry.
B: So I voted even though my vote was thrown away? That’s nonsensical!
A: Now you understand.
The legislature should implement a Top 2 primary using RCV. This eliminates the constitutional issues, permits a voter to rank all candidates running for office, and gives voters a second chance to evaluate the leading candidates. It also eliminates the incentive for the legislature to place barriers to candidate or party access.
A:
Top 2 is the worst solution to the voting problem. That’s like finding out people don’t have enough choices and then telling them they need fewer.
Brandon, fortunately, top two is a small step towards better elections, since Top Two guarantees two winners a maximum threshold of 33.33% (plus one vote, and a combined guaranteed satisfaction level of 66.66% (plus two votes).
It is people who do not do math and have no use for math, who are against Top Two. When you study the math, you will see that any two-winner election system is better than any one-winner district election system because teamwork requires two winners and one winner is like a roadblock compared to two winners.
In other words, if you are for teamwork, Top Two gives us a vehicle. If you only want to promote smack and ignore the math as most die-hard pluralist do, then you are opposed to Top Two.
Much as I favor switching to a ranked-voting system, I have to admit that the Constitution of Maine expressly states that the legislators and the governor are to be elected by a plurality. The proponents of the initiative have an uphill battle in the courts. They will have to show that plurality voting somehow contradicts other parts of the Constitution.
If ten people run in a primary and the results are: 1)15% 2)14%) 3)13% 4)12% 5)11% 6)10% 7)9% 8)7% 9)5% 10)4%
Then the top two people to go on to the general election only received 29% of the voted combined; that’s an UNSATISFACTION level of 71%
Walt, I don’t think that part of the Maine Constitution defeats instant runoff voting. I think the intent of that part of the Maine constitution is to say the election must be one-stage, not two-stages. And IRV satisfies that.
When someone gets a majority, he or she automatically has a plurality as well.
@Richard Winger: Ah, but what if someone got a plurality on the first round of counting, but not on the final round. Wouldn’t they have a case against the new law?
No, I would just say the first round is still the beginning of the vote-counting process, and it would be equivalent to someone who appears to be winning on election night, in a close election, but when all the provisional and absentee and late-arriving ballots are counted, the outcome is altered. The person who appeared to be winning on election night would have no claim that he or she had “won.”
What is being counted on the first Round? Are they votes or merely ballot markings? If they are votes, then a candidate has a plurality of votes.
It is contradictory to say that a candidate with a plurality of votes is elected, but a candidate must have a majority to be elected.
But if ballot markings are not votes, then some voters ballots will be discarded because they are not votes.
The Maine Constitution does not MANDATE a plurality, it allows for it. That is a change from when the Maine Constitution did mandate a majority, but since there rarely was one in races of 3 or more, which was a majority of elections, lawmakers were electing our officials, not the electorate. The Constitution has no words, not one, on how a plurality, in cases where the word is used, is to be reached. The Constitution frequently uses the words “greatest number of votes” but never mentions the form of voting we use now or any other form, nor does it prohibit, specifically, any other form of voting, i.e. ranked choice voting, instant run-off, etc.
The Maine Constitution does mandate a plurality, it allows for that possibility. Voters are being asked to mark their preference from first to last (but no one has to mark more than one preference, if there is not one, nor is anyone required to give even a last place preference to someone they would not like to see take any office. In essence, no preference becomes a vote until it goes to the highest, surviving candidate. For example if there are 4 candidates and voter one ranks three out of four, then he will have a preference and a vote for one of the top two. If he ranks two out of four, then his vote might well go to two candidates not forwarded to the final round, but his preferences will give one of two of those disqualified (disqualified as not having a majority) candidates. That vote is still counted and reported as part of the total electorate who voted in that race.