Rank your choices? Coming soon to a city near you 
IRV wins in four places across nation
By Mike Feinstein
Green Party of California

Greens have long advocated electoral reforms like instant run off voting (IRV) for single-seat elections and ranked-choice voting for multiple-seat elections. Both increase voters' ability to accurately express their preferences at the polls. 

Many Greens argue this not only is good democracy in general but also benefits the Green Party directly, as voters would feel freer to vote Green under IRV and ranked-choice voting instead of the present "winner-take-all" system. 

Aimee Allison and instant-runoff voting make the marquee in Oakland at the Grand Lake Theatre. photo: Neighbors for Aimee Allison

That's why the results this past Novem­ber give Greens (and other fans of 'democracy in America') much cause to celebrate. IRV passed with 68.6 percent in Oakland, CA (pop. 412,000), 65 percent in Minneapolis, MN (pop. 390,000); 52.9 percent in Pierce County, WA (pop. 760,000); and 55.4 percent on an advisory measure in Davis, CA (pop. 64,000).

With these recent victories, IRV has racked up an impressive eight consecutive wins at the polls in the last two years: Ferndale (MI) and Berkeley (CA) in 2004; Burlington (VT) and Takoma Park (MD) in 2005; and then the successes this year.

The wins in Davis and Minneapolis actually addressed both single-seat and multi-seat elections, marking the first ballot measure wins in a half-century for ranked choice voting. This is in effect the proportional voting version of IRV used for multi-seat elections.

Also indicating growing mainstream support for such ranked voting reform, each ballot measure went to voters with the backing of at least one major regional paper. Minneapolis: Star-Tribune, Minne­sota Daily; Oakland: Oakland Tribune, Ming Pao Daily; Davis: Sacramento Bee, California Aggie; Pierce County: Tacoma News Tribune, Peninsula Gateway.

Greens have played an important role in many of these campaigns. In Oakland, led by Laura Wells, the Alameda County Green Party made support for IRV - called Measure O - a major priority (see article on page 8). The state Green Party also supported the campaign to the tune of $2,000 from its Campaign Support Fund, recognizing the strategic importance of passing IRV in Oakland.

The stage was first set for the Oakland campaign back in 2002, when San Francisco voters approved Proposition A to use IRV for local elections. Proposition A was conceived and supported by the San Francisco Greens, and facilitated onto the ballot by then Green San Francisco supervisor Matt Gonzalez. 

Since then, three consecutive successful elections in San Francisco have clearly demonstrated that IRV works, and that San Francisco voters across all demographic lines understand how to rank candidates on their ballot. Oakland is one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the country and the Measure O built on this nearby history of success.

Early endorsements came from good government groups such as the League of Women Voters and Common Cause, while political parties across the spectrum - Democratic, Green, Peace & Freedom and Libertarian - all enthusiastically supported Measure O. The Central Labor Council, NAACP Youth & College Division, Spanish Speaking Citizens' Foundation, National Women's Political Caucus, Sierra Club and dozens more, soon joined them more. 

Half a country away in the Upper Mid­west, Minneapolis Green city council member Cam Gordon, a long-time IRV supporter, wrote this on his officeholder blog after his city passed IRV: 

"This is a huge step forward for Minne­apolis democracy, and hopefully only a first step towards better voting methods for the state and federal levels. I also consider this an important victory for the Green Party as well, which has had IRV in its platform for almost a decade and a top priority in Minneapolis since 2001. It's exciting to see mainstream voters enthusiastically embracing such a fundamental part of the Green platform."

"Even earlier this year, it would've been hard to predict that twelve Council Members would vote to put IRV on the ballot and 65 percent of voters would approve it. It's been a long road, and it feels great to win. I'm proud that my Ward had the highest 'yes' vote of any Ward in the City: 70.7 percent."

In the same election that Minneapolis approved its IRV Charter Amendment, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty was re-elected with only 46.7 percent of the vote, causing the Minneapolis Star-Tribune to editorialize in favor of IRV for statewide office, and tangentially making the Green Party's case: 

"Some of the ills big-party loyalists attribute to the rise and persistence of the Inde­pendence and Green parties are misplaced. More accurately, they are consequences of multiparty contests being decided by a plurality-take-all voting system."

"Last week, Minneapolis voters approved a switch to instant runoff voting for the next city election, in 2009. That exercise should be seen as a pilot project for the whole state."

"Between now and then, the Legislature should give instant runoff a thorough hearing, and direct the next secretary of state, Mark Ritchie (an instant runoff voting supporter), to make preliminary plans for a switch. If the system serves Minne­apolis well in 2009, it should be ready for the whole state in 2010."

Back in California, an advisory measure passed in Davis to approve ranked-choice voting for the city council, but still needs a charter amendment (or approval by the state) to implement it. Here again local Greens were initially involved in publicizing the issue locally. In February 2003, after a campaign led by the Campus Greens at UC Davis, the student body overwhelmingly passed the ASUCD Choice Voting Amendment - 67 percent to 33 percent, bringing IRV to the ASUCD presidential race and proportional representation to the ASUCD senate elections.

And in Washington State, Pierce County Green Richard Anderson-Connally was one of the two main in-county activists that got Amendment 3, the IRV charter amendment, on the ballot. While not as high profile as Oakland or Minneapolis, the win in Pierce County - a county of nearly 800,000 people that closely reflects the demographics of its state - may make Washington the best prospect for a statewide ballot measure, particularly given the unpopularity of that state's primary system that IRV would replace.

Around the nation, prospects for ranked choice voting also advanced with three key wins in state legislatures in 2006: the Vermont legislature passed legislation to require the secretary of state to develop a plan for running statewide IRV elections in 2008; North Carolina established IRV for certain vacancy elections and for use in up to 20 pilot elections in cities and counties in 2007-08; and South Carolina joined Arkansas and Louisiana in having overseas voters cast IRV ballots in the first round of elections with potential runoffs to ensure their ballot counts in the runoff.

For more information, see the Center for Voting & Democracy www.fairvote.org 

----------

Back to Winter 2007