On April 13, the Maine Supreme Court heard arguments over whether the Maine Constitution is compatible with ranked choice voting. Here is an article that seems to have been written as the hearing was underway. All it says is that the Justices had tough questions. The article doesn’t say whether that means they had tough questions for both sides, or just one side. Later today there will probably be more detailed news stories. Check back. UPDATE: here is a news story with somewhat more detail. FURTHER UPDATE: see this Portland Press Herald story, the most comprehensive. Two of the justices seem to feel Ranked Choice Voting will mean the end of the two-party system, which is a very peculiar idea.
You can download and listen to the oral arguments from this page, as well as read all the briefs that were filed: http://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/supreme/senate_question_2017/index.html
Honestly, it should be obliviously slow ended of three centuries long two-party system that most Americans are begin despised and I’m one them.
If ranked choice voting will break the two party system, then I’m for it.
“Two of the justices seem to feel Ranked Choice Voting will mean the end of the two-party system, which is a very peculiar idea.” I agree that — when RCV is implemented in single-member districts, as is true in Maine — this is a peculiar idea. But some RCV activists seem to believe it themselves. Less so now than a few years ago, but I suspect the notion still has currency among supporters.
Walt,
Preferential voting was implemented in Australia to preserve the two-party system.
IMO, whether or not raked choice voting supports the two party system depends on how voters cast votes 1 and 2. If one of their first 2 choices is for an existing “top 2” party, then it will; otherwise not.
http://www.pressherald.com/2017/05/23/maine-high-court-says-ranked-choice-voting-is-unconstitutional/