IRV in Minneapolis was a bad idea two years ago and it is a bad idea today!
The trouble with IRV is that it allows the person with the most votes to lose. There is nothing undemocratic about going to the polls and voting for the person you think should be in that office. It is especially democratic that the person(s) with the most votes wins. The process of reallocating second and third choice votes to be equal to first choice votes is in my opinion inherently undemocratic. Under the IRV scheme presented to the Minneapolis charter commission a couple of years ago, it was eminently possible for a person who received to the most number of "first choice" votes to lose. It was also shown that it is quite possible in a three or four way race that a candidate receiving twice as many "first place" votes to lose to another candidate after the "second choice" and "third choice" votes are reallocated! In my opinion, it is manifestly undemocratic to allow a candidate with the most "first choice" votes to have an election stolen from him/her because someone else was a popular second choice. IRV places the concept of "majority" on a tall pedestal that I do not believe that it belongs on. There is not one shred of evidence to demonstrate that a successful candidate elected with a majority of votes is a better officeholder than one elected with a plurality of votes. I believe - strongly - that the act of voting requires making a decision. Some of my friends tell me that they really want to vote for this person but are afraid if they vote for that person then someone who they really don't like could be elected so they are forced to vote for someone they don't like as much to keep from electing somewhat they like less! They like IRV because then they could in effect "vote" for two or three people rather than have to make a choice! Frankly, I see nothing wrong or improper with that dilemma. In the end, cast your vote and walk away knowing that you made your choice. What is particularly maddening is trying to figure out what is taking place in Minneapolis elections that IRV needs to fix? City council, mayor, school board, park & recreation board, library board, board of estimate & taxation are all officially non-partisan (although the political parties do endorse candidates for those seats) and IRV is not going to change that. An argument was made that Minneapolis is dominated by the DFL and that other parties do not have a "fair chance" and IRV would give them a "fairer chance". I don't buy that. If DFL candidates do well, it is because more voters decide that those candidates are more reflective of their views or are more responsive to their issues, not because the voting system is flawed. IRV is a scheme that trashes the notion of one vote per person and replaces it with complex and undemocratic process that can defeat the preferred choice of voters. Minneapolis does not need IRV. Jim Bernstein Fulton -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeanne Massey Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 1:43 PM Instant run-off voting (IRV) would eliminate the vitriolic attacks against Nader as a voter would be able to vote for his/her choice without worrying about throwing the vote away. Those wishing for better candidates feel trapped by our inadequate and undemocratic electoral system. There was an effort in Minneapolis a few years ago to get IRV on the ballot. It seems time to renew this effort and provide Minneapolis residents with a more democratic mechanism for electing local officials. What starts locally can grow statewide and, who knows, perhaps one day we may enjoy IRV nationwide.... a distant dream. But, we can make it happen locally. If anyone is, or is interested in, working on this issue, please contact me off list. Jeanne Massey Kingfield ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Oines" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: September 13, 2004 12:49 PM Subject: RE: [Mpls] RALLY with RALPH NADER! > I think you've been reading too much propaganda Mr. Plante. He's not > aligned with either, and you knew that, right? > > The fact is that a significant number of people in Minneapolis have elected > Greens and Independents in recent years at various levels of local > government. > > If our national races were somewhat on the more even playing field that > local MN races are, if registration were as easy as it is here, if ballot > access were as easy as it is here, if national public affairs media were as > inclusive as TPT and MPR, then we might have similar results in national > races and be able to have a little more diversity of politics. > > But cynicism is much more fun, right? > > This will be my last thought as it is starting to get pretty non-Minneapolis > specific. > > Eric Oines > Lind-Bohanon > North Minneapolis > > "One day we must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we > seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue > peaceful ends through peaceful means." > ~ Martin Luther King Jr., Agitator > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: "Dennis Plante" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Mpls] RALLY with RALPH NADER! > Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:22:27 -0500 > > You're absolutely right Eric. Who am I to fly in the face of conventional > wisdom and assert that most of those (in Mpls) that vote for Nader would > have probably voted for Kerry? I mean afterall, Nader is much more > similarly aligned to Bush than he is Kerry. > > dennis plante > jordan > > > REMINDERS: > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
