|
Many a concerned Democrat wishes Ralph Nader the spoiler would drop out of the presidential election. Many who support Nader in principle will sigh with resignation as they cast their votes for John Kerry in November. Many a conservative unhappily votes for Republicans rather than Libertarians in every election. Many who are unhappy with their choices have given up on voting altogether.
In Washington, Initiative 318 could change all that very soon by implementing a system called instant runoff voting (IRV). Here’s how it works:
On Election Day, voters would find themselves looking at a ballot asking them to rank as many of the candidates as they like in the order of their preference. If any candidate won a majority of first-choice votes s/he would win. But here’s the twist—if no candidate received a majority of the vote, the candidate with the least votes would be eliminated. Each ballot cast for the eliminated candidate would be re-assigned to the candidates selected as the second choice. This process would be repeated until someone had a majority, and would apply to both state and federal elections.
Put simply, this system would allow voters to vote, for example, for Nader and for Kerry (as a sort of insurance policy). As campaign member and former Green Party congressional candidate Joe Szwaja puts it, “it allows people to vote for who they want really want to, their hopes rather than their fears.”
The members of IRVWA, the nonprofit corporation organizing the campaign for I-318, point to many benefits that could be reaped from this kind of a system. “We see more and more dissatisfaction with the two parties. We see more and more people who say they are independent or third party. [They’re] feeling trapped by the plurality system,” said Richard Anderson-Connoly, a member of the IRVWA board of directors. “Instant runoff voting is a way of reducing the power of the two parties, because they really are abusing their power.”
In addition, supporters point out that IRV would eliminate the need for a state run primary altogether, an idea that appeals to many in light of the recent elimination of Washington’s blanket primary system. The official candidates of the parties would all appear on the November ballot, along with any other candidates who met the requirements.
IRV advocates also say this system would change the way candidates’ campaign. Since second choice votes would be important to candidates, campaigns would likely become more issue-oriented and less based on negative personal attacks. New ideas could be injected into the political process through communication and cooperation between parties with similar goals.
In addition, Szwaja pointed to the benefits of increased voter turnout and the election of more women and minority candidates in places where IRV has already been implemented.
The idea of instant runoff voting in Washington has a wide range of support. I-318 has been endorsed by the Libertarian Party, the Christian conservative American Heritage Party, the Green Party, Krist Noveselic, Dennis Kucinich, state representatives, and many others.
However, not everyone is a fan of the idea. Chris Vance, the chairman of the state’s Republican party recently told the Post-Intelligencer that he considers instant runoff voting to be a “bizarre system,” supported only by “fringe looney-tune parties.” Although the state’s Democratic party has made no official comment, it is clear to Anderson-Connoly the leadership of both parties is displeased with the idea.
Others, such as Secretary of State Sam Reed, are concerned that the system would be too complicated for voters, or for the state government, to deal with. Szwaja disagrees. “I think we make those kinds of choices every day in all kinds of activities,” he said.
In all likelihood, if I-318 passes, one or both of the major parties will challenge it in court. Cronk, who is a lawyer, is not concerned about this possibility. “Some people want to claim that IRV violates the ‘one person, one vote’ concept,” he said. “That’s not true at all. Everyone has an equal chance and that’s all the law requires.”
Cronk also cited Williams v. Rhodes, a US Supreme Court case from 1968 in which Justice Harlan suggested an instant runoff voting system to remedy the problem of the “splintering” of votes that resulted from minor parties running candidates for the presidency.
What are the chances of this actually happening? The campaign must collect 197,734 signatures by December 31 in order to get I-318 on the 2005 ballot. “At this point we’re not seeing the numbers we need to see,” Gearhart said. If those numbers don’t improve, however, the battle is not over. “We’ve all committed to re-filing. We’ve committed to each other and we’ve committed to the people who are out there in the field working for this.”
Szwaja is a little more optimistic. He hopes voters’ displeasure with Washington’s new primary system, along with more outreach, will give I-318 a boost this fall: “I’ve seen campaigns really take off once the public really gets it, and I’m hoping that’s what’s going to happen.”
For more information about I-318 and instant runoff voting, visit irvwa.org and fairvote.org
|
