Instant Runoff Voting Update

IRV has been popping up in a variety of post-election discussions I've been having lately.

I was reasonably active with IRV issues when I lived in California.  For example, I drove Steven Hill around to several venues when he came to San Luis Obispo on a speaking tour.  Had a nice lunch with him at the Big Sky Cafe too. 

He'd recently had his book, Fixing Elections, published and was kind enough to sign a copy which I later gave as a gift to my niece the lawyer.

Amazon.com - Fixing Elections

One of the best websites with IRV information is the FairVote.org site.  They have oodles of stuff on IRV issues.

Fair Vote - IRV America

IRV seems to finally be getting a toe hold in various areas (Vermont and California in particular) and I think that's good for democracy in general as whoever is elected is the candidate that has the most support from the people - which is as it should be.  And it saves folks money which is no small thing.

However, the idea that it is always going to be a unidirectional benefit to third parties seems to me to be a bit overstated by both Greens who are for it and Democrats who are against it. 

There is obviously the elimination of the spoiler effect that will tend to help the larger party in most instances (certainly in the near term) but there's more than just that, imo.

For example, I've always wondered if third party candidate Jesse Ventura would have become governor of Minnesota had it been an IRV election.  In particular, would the runoff between Coleman and Ventura have resulted in a Ventura victory?  I'm not so certain it would.  Recall the race was 37 to 34 to 29 for Ventura, Coleman and Humphrey, respectively. 

Body Slam - Salon.com

Coleman might have won the second round had the liberal voters for Humphrey not picked a second round option, out of disgust at the options, and traditional conservative voters for Humphrey moved to Coleman as the second choice.  I haven't seen any exit polling to confirm or deny this but it seems within the realm of reasonable possibilities.

(No small irony in this race since Humphrey insisted on having Ventura in the debates to carve off votes from Coleman.  Humphrey had been ahead of Coleman and Ventura going into the debates as I recall.)

This is another nice effect of IRV.  Candidates tend not to go negative on each other so much.  In a two candidate race, it's a zero sum game.  Bashing your opponent can help out your campaign in relative terms. 

In IRV races, candidates realize that they might not win in the first round and will need supporters of other candidates to get the winning margin.  So you tend not to tick those folks off intentionally during the campaign. 

Also if the two main candidates go negative, any remaining candidate might win the spill-off from that activity.  Consider how disgusted some of the voters were with the nasty negative campaigns of this last election cycle. 

IRV might keep negative campaigning from happening so much.  There's evidence of that in the recent San Francisco races which could be pretty rough prior to IRV.

New Runoff System in San Francisco Has the Rival Candidates Cooperating - NY Times [pdf version]

The other classic historic example of how IRV might not benefit third parties is when the extreme-right-wing Le Pen won a spot in the French presidential runoff in France.  The left vote got so splintered that it allowed Le Pen to be the runoff candidate against Chirac instead of the traditional Socialist candidate.

"France: In the first round of presidential elections, incumbent Jacques Chirac (Rally for the Republic) wins 19.9% of the vote, Jean-Marie Le Pen (National Front) 16.9%, Prime Minister Lionel Jospin (Socialist) 16.2%, François Bayrou (Union for French Democracy) 6.8%, Arlette Laguiller (Workers' Fight) 5.7%, Jean-Pierre Chevènement (Citizens' Movement) 5.3%, Noël Mamère (Green) 5.3%, Olivier Besancenot (Communist Revolutionary League) 4.2%, Jean Saint-Josse (Hunting, Fishing, Nature, Traditions) 4.2%, Alain Madelin (Liberal Democracy) 3.9%, and Robert Hue (Communist) 3.4%."  - Rulers - April 2002

Almost all that left vote ended up for Chirac in the final tally.  Had there been an IRV race, Le Pen and his third party would never have made it to the second and final round.

Chirac to Face Le Pen in May 5 Runoff, Jospin Admits Early Defeat - People's Daily (China)
France unites to halt Le Pen - Guardian (UK)

Instant Runoff Voting Update

IRV has been popping up in a variety of post-election discussions I've been having lately.

I was reasonably active with IRV issues when I lived in California.  For example, I drove Steven Hill around to several venues when he came to San Luis Obispo on a speaking tour.  Had a nice lunch with him at the Big Sky Cafe too. 

He'd recently had his book, Fixing Elections, published and was kind enough to sign a copy which I later gave as a gift to my niece the lawyer.

Amazon.com - Fixing Elections

One of the best websites with IRV information is the FairVote.org site.  They have oodles of stuff on IRV issues.

Fair Vote - IRV America

IRV seems to finally be getting a toe hold in various areas (Vermont and California in particular) and I think that's good for democracy in general as whoever is elected is the candidate that has the most support from the people - which is as it should be.  And it saves folks money which is no small thing.

However, the idea that it is always going to be a unidirectional benefit to third parties seems to me to be a bit overstated by both Greens who are for it and Democrats who are against it. 

There is obviously the elimination of the spoiler effect that will tend to help the larger party in most instances (certainly in the near term) but there's more than just that, imo.

For example, I've always wondered if third party candidate Jesse Ventura would have become governor of Minnesota had it been an IRV election.  In particular, would the runoff between Coleman and Ventura have resulted in a Ventura victory?  I'm not so certain it would.  Recall the race was 37 to 34 to 29 for Ventura, Coleman and Humphrey, respectively. 

Body Slam - Salon.com

Coleman might have won the second round had the liberal voters for Humphrey not picked a second round option, out of disgust at the options, and traditional conservative voters for Humphrey moved to Coleman as the second choice.  I haven't seen any exit polling to confirm or deny this but it seems within the realm of reasonable possibilities.

(No small irony in this race since Humphrey insisted on having Ventura in the debates to carve off votes from Coleman.  Humphrey had been ahead of Coleman and Ventura going into the debates as I recall.)

This is another nice effect of IRV.  Candidates tend not to go negative on each other so much.  In a two candidate race, it's a zero sum game.  Bashing your opponent can help out your campaign in relative terms. 

In IRV races, candidates realize that they might not win in the first round and will need supporters of other candidates to get the winning margin.  So you tend not to tick those folks off intentionally during the campaign. 

Also if the two main candidates go negative, any remaining candidate might win the spill-off from that activity.  Consider how disgusted some of the voters were with the nasty negative campaigns of this last election cycle. 

IRV might keep negative campaigning from happening so much.  There's evidence of that in the recent San Francisco races which could be pretty rough prior to IRV.

New Runoff System in San Francisco Has the Rival Candidates Cooperating - NY Times [pdf version]

The other classic historic example of how IRV might not benefit third parties is when the extreme-right-wing Le Pen won a spot in the French presidential runoff in France.  The left vote got so splintered that it allowed Le Pen to be the runoff candidate against Chirac instead of the traditional Socialist candidate.

"France: In the first round of presidential elections, incumbent Jacques Chirac (Rally for the Republic) wins 19.9% of the vote, Jean-Marie Le Pen (National Front) 16.9%, Prime Minister Lionel Jospin (Socialist) 16.2%, François Bayrou (Union for French Democracy) 6.8%, Arlette Laguiller (Workers' Fight) 5.7%, Jean-Pierre Chevènement (Citizens' Movement) 5.3%, Noël Mamère (Green) 5.3%, Olivier Besancenot (Communist Revolutionary League) 4.2%, Jean Saint-Josse (Hunting, Fishing, Nature, Traditions) 4.2%, Alain Madelin (Liberal Democracy) 3.9%, and Robert Hue (Communist) 3.4%."  - Rulers - April 2002

Almost all that left vote ended up for Chirac in the final tally.  Had there been an IRV race, Le Pen and his third party would never have made it to the second and final round.

Chirac to Face Le Pen in May 5 Runoff, Jospin Admits Early Defeat - People's Daily (China)
France unites to halt Le Pen - Guardian (UK)