The Maine initiative to use instant runoff voting for federal and state office will be submitted this month. Proponents have collected approximately 75,000 signatures. Assuming they have enough, the measure will appear on the November 2016 ballot. See this story.
This measure will cement the two-party system into the future as long as it is in effect. Not even random wins caused by the split vote can happen.
Are you ready for pure proportional representation (PR) for all parties and independents?
The 9th USA Parliament has been using PR for 20 consecutive years and it works fine.
http://www.usparliament.org
The last time Burlington, Vermont used IRV for Mayor, the Progressive Party nominee won.
When New York city used ranked choice voting for city council, five different parties elected councilmembers. The only partisan elections the Communist Party ever won in the U.S. were in those New York city elections.
IRV makes more sense in many of those local elections this year for offices like city council. Often times the primary is in September. We could eliminate the primary and allow all candidates to run until November. This would save some tax payer money.
The article tefetred to sinvle winner election districts and not multi-winner districts for Maine.
In regards to NY school districts, they are most likely multi-winner districts, which do lower thtesholds and most likely would elect smaller interest groups.
Thete is a big difference between the two types of elections, sinfle-winner and multi-winner districts using IRV.
Single-winner districts have a minimum threshold of 50% plus one vote, and the article specifically mentioned the guarateed majority support for candidates.
My comment was explaing the back and forth nature and how IRV cements the two-party system.
IRV generally implies single-winners.
(sorry about the typos, I’m using my cell phone to read BAN)
Top Two would be a better step towards fair elections than IRV in Maine state elections for third parties and independents.