I'd like to take a minute to tell you all about what I think is a great idea: Instant Runoff Voting, or IRV. It's a type of electoral reform, and to sum it up, everyone ranks the candidates by their preference, instead of only voting for one. If no candidate gets a majority, the candidate with the least number of votes is eliminated. But people who voted for them are not forgotten: whoever they ranked as their number two pick gets their vote. This continues until a candidate gets the majority.
Why do I like this idea so much? To give you a bit of background on me, I am a big fan both of electoral reform and of third parties. And using IRV for the presidential election would be a victory for both of those. The main idea is that you can vote your conscience without any fear of losing your voice. I'm constantly torn between supporting 3rd party candidates that I like a lot, such as Ralph Nader (Nader just as an example... people who know me know that I greatly prefer Kucinich), or the mainstream candidate that I like more than the other, which is Barack Obama. So if IRV were in place, I could vote for Nader, and put Obama as my number 2 pick. That way, if Nader doesn't win, then my vote will still go to a candidate that I would like to see in office.
Now, people may say that this idea is useless because third parties never win. But if this were in place, maybe third parties in the USA would become a bigger force than they are (not necessarily electing presidents, but perhaps mayors and governors). People will be empowered to vote for who they really believe in, without fear of being discounted by the broken electoral system. And I'm not saying that I think Nader, or Barr, or any non-major party candidate could win the 2008 election, even with IRV in place. But I think that they would definitely get a larger amount of votes, and that is what is important to me. People should be able to express that they like a candidate, and really believe in her or his ideas, rather than holding their nose and voting for whoever they dislike the least. It will at least let people know that there are alternatives to the Democrats and Republicans, and that there are lots of people who support them. If we had IRV, I don't think NAder would win, but I think he would have a lot more than 6% of the vote.
Some resources to learn about IRV:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Counting_the_votes
http://www.fairvote.org/irv/
http://instantrunoff.com/
Friday, July 4, 2008
Instant Runoff Voting
Posted by Sam at 2:09 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
What would the cost be to communities for the implementation of these systems? Seems like something that could, if ever, happen a long time from now.
Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with our election process necessarily, but with the electoral college, rather. I think that one person should get one vote. But that vote should mean a lot more than it means now.
Seeing as runoffs already exist, on the surface the instant runoff seems like more of a time saver than anything else, but I agree with you Sam that it could have the potential to be so much more.
Knowing that you can vote for who you please (even if that be a third party you know won't win) without your voice being lost in the process is HUGE. I think there would be much more third party voting, and voting in general.
This is great, one of those small ideas that could make a big difference.
And Brien, I think this would in general have more to do with local/state elections anyways so the electoral college can be considered as a completely different issue.
Ah, well then I withdraw that comment.
Post a Comment