Instant Runoff Voting (Ranked Choice Voting) Presented By: Rob Richie, Executive Director The Center for Voting and Democracy (The Center is a non-profit, non-partisan organization in Maryland. Its chairman is former Congressman John Anderson, who lives and votes in Fort Lauderdale) Website: www.fairvote.org/irv

Summary of Presentation 1. History of Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) 2.IRV: What, How, Why (from presentation by Vermont Secretary of State to N.A.S.S.) 3. Addressing Concerns 4. Contrasting Runoffs and IRV in Florida 5. Recommendations for Legislative Action

Brief History of Instant Runoff Voting An American invention in 1870 Early use, including in Florida International: Australia, Ireland, London Non-governmental organizations and Robert’s Rules of Order Rising interest in the United States: San Francisco, Utah, Louisiana

Secretary of the State of Vermont: Deborah L. Markowitz Plurality Rules [CLICK] - Pie Chart 1 Most U.S. elections use plurality rules -- whichever candidate gets the most votes wins. Candidate A has 56% and B has 44%, so clearly A should defeat B and be declared elected. [CLICK] - Candidate A Winner This works fine and assures that the majority rules… UNLESS there happen to be more than two candidates. Let’s go back in time and assume the exact same candidates and the same voters, but suppose one more candidate happened to decide to enter the race -- candidate C. [CLICK] - 2nd pie chart In this scenario, candidate C is more appealing to voters who would otherwise choose candidate A. Even though we know a majority of voters prefer A over B, under current plurality rules, B is declared the winner. [CLICK] - Candidate B Winner [CLICK] - But majority prefer A over B The true majority choice (A) is defeated merely because of a decision made by one person (C) to run. This is a denial of the fundamental cornerstone of democracy - majority rule! But majority prefer A over B Winner Winner Secretary of the State of Vermont: Deborah L. Markowitz

Second-Election Runoffs If no candidate receives a majority, all candidates but the top two are eliminated. A second “runoff” election is conducted between the finalists. Advantages Assures majority winner in second election Problems Added taxpayer expense for second election Added candidate expense for runoff Often lower voter turnout for runoff Can be difficult to administer Potential compromise candidate could be eliminated after first round in big field [CLICK] - One solution that is used some places, including in the U.S., is a second runoff election. This method finds a majority winner by holding a second election (if necessary) of the top two candidates from the first round. There is a substantial cost for the taxpayer and the candidates. Voter turnout in runoff elections is usually significantly lower. The Center for Voting and Democracy has prepared a report on runoff elections in federal primaries that will show just how dramatic the typical drop-off in turnout is in runoff primaries. From 1994 to 2000, there were 70 federal primary runoffs, and turnout dropped in 68 of them. The average turnout drop in these races was 34%. San Francisco’s last runoff election in December 2000 cost nearly $2 million and had a drop-off in turnout of nearly 50%. Alabama spent some three million dollars on its recent runoff. Turnout in statewide runoffs in North Carolina and Texas in 2000 dropped below 5% of registered voters. They are Difficult to administer. Getting new ballots printed and running a whole new election involves a lot of administration and headaches. In a crowded primary race, for example, most of the voters may have picked candidates other than the two top candidates, who may have narrow bases of support.

What Is Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)? Method of voting that requires a majority to elect a candidate Determines a majority winner through instant runoffs using voter preferences until one candidate has a majority Cheaper and more efficient than second elections because voters go to the polls only once [CLICK] What Is Instant Runoff Voting? First and foremost, instant runoff voting is a method of voting that ensures the core of democracy - majority rules. This is done by allowing each voter to specify his or her order of preference for candidates. The winner is determined through a series of instant runoffs –eliminating candidates at the bottom, either one at a time, or in a group – similar to a regular runoff. Second elections are used in some places to assures a majority vote, but at a monetary cost. IRV eliminates this problem. IRV achieves a more efficient and less expensive way of securing the foundation of democracy: majority rules.

How IRV Works Declare a winner Voters Vote Their Preferences Yes Tally All Ballots Is there a majority winner? [CLICK] - Voters Vote Their Preferences Voters are given the option of ranking candidates in order of preference. A voter can still vote for just one candidate if they don’t like any of the other choices. [CLICK] - Tally All Ballots When the ballots are tallied election night, initially only the first choices are counted. [CLICK] - Declare a winner If one candidate is the first choice of more than half the voters you have a majority winner. [CLICK] - No majority But if no candidate reaches the majority threshold, an instant runoff is conducted. This can be done automatically by modern electronic voting technology or treated as a recount, depending on the particular circumstances in your state. [CLICK] - Eliminate lowest candidate In the instant runoff, the candidates at the bottom, with no mathematical chance of winning are eliminated, either sequentially, or in a group. [CLICK] - Retally Ballots Just like in a regular runoff, the voters’ whose favorites are out of the running have to settle for their next choice among the finalists. But his is already indicated on their ballot. In each round of counting every ballot counts as one vote for whichever of the remaining candidates is most preferred by each voter. The process of eliminating candidates and retallying the votes is repeated until a majority winner is determined. In this manner the candidate preferred by the majority of voters can be determined with a single election, no matter how many candidates are running. No more spoiler problem. Instant runoff voting has not been used much in the U.S., but it has been consistently upheld by the courts as a valid voting system that complies with the one person, one vote principle. No Retally Ballots No majority Eliminate lowest candidate

IRV - Typical Ballot The voter is presented with a list of all candidates and given option of specifying his or her order of choice for candidates. The voter may indicate just one choice, or more than one choice. Ballot for Office In a nutshell, instant runoff voting determines the majority winner in a single election by combining a runoff into the original election. [CLICK] - Sample Ballot This is done by use of the innovation of a rank-order ballot, also called the “single transferable vote” -- allowing voters to indicate their favorite candidate and their runoff choices at the same time. The voter can vote for a single candidate the same as presently. [CLICK] - Sample Ballot With All Checks But if she is concerned that her favorite may not make it into the runoff stage, she has the option of also indicating her runoff choices by ranking as many candidates as she wishes.

IRV- Proposed Vermont Ballot This ballot has been tentatively approved by my elections office for use if Vermont passes its pending IRV bill. Vermont legislation gives the Secretary of State the authority to limit the number of rankings to three if ballot design for older machines makes that prudent. While limiting a voter’s preferences to three candidates is not ideal, it accomplishes the main thrust of IRV. This is a prime example of incorporating IRV into your state’s election procedure, even without the ideal equipment for it.

IRV vs. Runoffs: Step #1 Delayed Runoff Voters go to the polls and mark their favorite candidate on the ballot. Instant Runoff Voters go to the polls and mark their favorite candidate as their #1 choice. They also can indicate runoff choices by ranking candidates.

IRV vs. Runoffs: Step #2 Delayed Runoff If no candidate receives a majority, a second election is called. Instant Runoff If no candidate receives a majority, the instant runoff ballot count takes place.

IRV vs. Runoffs: Step #3 Delayed Runoff Candidates resume raising money and campaigning. New ballots are printed and polling stations set up again. Voter turnout usually drops. Instant Runoff Skip step 3.

IRV vs. Runoffs: Step #4 Delayed Runoff If your favorite candidate advances to runoff, you mark a new ballot for this candidate. If your favorite is eliminated, you mark a ballot for your next choice among runoff candidates. Instant Runoff If your favorite candidate advances to runoff count, your ballot counts for this candidate again. If your favorite eliminated, ballot counts for next choice among runoff candidates.

IRV vs. Runoffs: Step #5 Delayed Runoff The candidate with the majority of the votes (of those voting in runoff election) wins. Instant Runoff The candidate with the majority of the votes wins.

IRV vs. Runoffs: Summary Instant Runoff Saves tax dollars One election, not two More convenient for voters / administrators Maximizes turnout in decisive election Delayed Runoff Requires tax dollars Extends campaign Inconvenient for voters / administrators Lower turnout in decisive elections

Addressing Concerns: Voters and Administrators Can Handle IRV Low voter error rate where IRV used Voter education timely with 2004 elections Voting equipment vendors are telling jurisdictions they can support IRV One-time costs for transition to IRV still less expensive than one year of runoffs

Runoffs in Florida: A Few Facts Winners in multi-candidate state primaries are very likely to win the general election Multi-candidate primaries are not unusual With runoffs, frontrunning candidates after the first primary will sometimes lose Voter turnout almost always drops significantly in down-ballot races that go to runoffs

Runoff Election Winners, 1998-2002 * In 2002, non-majority winners in primaries

Contested Primary Races Requiring Runoffs, 98-2002 Number of Races that went to a Runoff: 1998 – 9 2000 – 22 2002 – 23* * In 2002, indicates number of plurality winners in primary

Contested Florida and Statewide Primaries Requiring Runoffs, 1982-2000

Turnout Decline in FL Federal/Statewide Runoffs, 1982-2000

Average Turnout Decline in Federal Runoffs, 1994-2002

Multi-Candidate Primaries for Individual Florida Voters: 2000 Democratic Primary Republican Primary US Senate / Sen. 33 / Rep. 22 / Rep. 8 / Rep. 9 / Rep. 10 / Rep. 39 / Rep. 84 / Rep. 87 / Rep. 88 / Rep. 89 / Rep. 94 / Rep. 106 / Rep. 109 / Rep. 118 US House 8 / Rep. 25 US House 8 / Rep 34 US House 8 / Rep. 40 Sen. 13 / Rep 54 Sen. 13 / Rep 60 Sen. 13 / Rep 69 Sen. 27 / Rep 74 Sen. 27 / Rep 82 Sen. 27 / Rep 83 Sen. 39 / Rep. 117 ____________________ ____ = Decided in Runoff

Suggestions for Legislative Action Adopt instant runoff voting for 2004 primaries Adopt instant runoff voting for 2004 federal primaries Adopt instant runoff voting for special elections to fill vacancies that otherwise require two voting rounds Establish study commission to evaluate instant runoff voting for 2006 primaries Adopt legislation, if needed, to facilitate counties using instant runoff voting Adopt legislation to implement instant runoff voting for overseas voters in federal, state or local runoffs

For More Information The Center for Voting and Democracy 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610 Takoma Park, MD 20912 (301) 270-4161 www.fairvote.org/irv