Also see: [IRV History in Ann Arbor] . [1974/75 Charter Language] . [Center for Voting and Democracy]

by Craig Harvey, Huron Valley Greens

New Idea? Require Election Winners to Get a Majority of the Vote

That's what runoff elections provide, and Instant Runoff Voting
(IRV) is even better (quicker, easier, and less expensive).  Ann
Arbor used to have it.  But now we, like most areas of the U.S.,
use a rather unrepresentative method of counting votes that
allows winning an election with only a plurality of the vote
(i.e., less than a majority in a multi-party election). 


What is Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) ?

Instant runoff voting (IRV) is an election reform that is rapidly
gaining attention throughout the United States. Major efforts to
replace existing plurality election laws with this more
democratic alternative are underway in Alaska, New Mexico,
Vermont, Washington, California, and elsewhere. Instant Runoff
Voting allows for better voter choice and participation by
accommodating multiple candidates in single seat races, while
assuring that a "spoiler"-effect will not result in undemocratic
outcomes. Instant runoff voting allows all voters to vote for
their favorite candidate without fear of helping elect their
least favorite candidate, and it ensures that the winner enjoys
true support from a majority of the voters. Plurality voting,
used in most American elections, does not meet these basic
requirements for a fair election system that promotes wide
participation. 

IRV allows voters to rank candidates as their first choice,
second choice, third, fourth and so on. If a candidate does not
receive a clear majority of votes on the first count, a series of
runoff counts are conducted, using each voter's top choices
indicated on the ballot. The candidate who received the fewest
first place ballots is eliminated. The ballots are then
retabulated, with each counting as a vote for the top-ranked
candidate listed on the ballot that is still in contention.
Voters who chose the now-eliminated candidate have their vote
transferred to their second choice candidate -- just as if they
were voting in a traditional two-round runoff election. This
process continues until one candidate achieves more than fifty
percent of the vote.

[See example of what an IRV ballot might have looked like for the
recent presidential election.]

IRV has been in successful use for decades in Australia and is
used to elect the President of the Republic of Ireland and, most
recently, the mayor of London, England.

Around the U.S. more than 21 cities, including Kalamazoo, have
used full-choice ballots in the 20th Century (and one, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, still does).  They quit only because political
machine bosses hate voting systems that give voters more choices.
The full-choice ballots that have been used in these cities are
the same type of ballot that is used with IRV.  

Further, the American Political Science Association, which
includes the psephologists (voting experts) uses IRV to elect its
officers.

But it is true that there are no current, U.S. public election
examples of IRV -- although the choice voting system used in
Cambridge, Massachusetts is not to be sneezed at... they use
choice voting (multi-winner form of IRV) and have happily done so
since 1943, resisting several repeal efforts driven by the
parties who want 100% of the power for far less than 100% of the
votes.

Thanks to the recent presidential election fiasco in Florida,
many states, including Michigan, are seriously looking at
election reforms such as standardizing voting machines and
ballots.  Any such decision must take into consideration the need
for voting machines and ballots that can handle voters marking
1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. choices.  Whether or not IRV is put into use
statewide, this would at least allow municipalities the option of
using much fairer voting systems such as Instant Runoff Voting
for single winner offices like Mayor, or choice voting for
multi-winner offices like school or library boards. 


Ann Arbor Makes History: 

The most recent use of IRV for a governmental election in the
U.S. was in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1975.  The presence in Ann
Arbor of a strong third party, the Human Rights Party, created a
lively three-way election.  Republican Mayor James Stephenson was
up for reelection in April 1975.  In the previous election he had
won with only 47% of the vote.  

There were concerns about the Human Rights Party splintering the
vote and giving Stephenson yet another win with less than a
majority of the votes.  So, in 1974 the Human Rights Party led a
successful local petition drive and managed to place the
following question on the November 1974 Ann Arbor ballot: 

"Shall the City Charter be amended to provide that the Mayor
shall be elected by a majority of voters, by permitting each
voter to designate a first preference and subsequent preferences;
so that if no candidate receives a majority of first preferences,
then the candidate with the fewest such votes is eliminated and
second preferences of the voters for that candidate are counted
instead, the process being repeated until one candidate receives
a majority of valid votes?"

This won the approval of about 52% of the voters. Voting was
mostly along partisan lines (Democrats for/Republicans against). 

In March of 1975, prior to the April city election, there was a
public hearing and a city-wide mailing to educate voters on how
the system would work. 

In the April 1975 election the use of Instant Runoff Voting led
to the election of the first ever African-American Mayor
(Democrat Al Wheeler).  This occurred because of the strength of
second-choice votes transferred from the Human Rights Party
candidate.  In the first preferences the tally showed:

 Democrats 40%, Republicans 49%, Human Rights Party 11%

But since most of the HRP voters chose Wheeler (Dem) as their
second choice, he won the final tally by 121 votes.

This success at having a mayor who best represented the wishes of
the majority of voters prompted an effort by Republicans to
eliminate the system.  An initial legal challenge failed as the
courts upheld the IRV law.  But the Republicans led a further
repeal effort, and in a low turnout special election in April
1976 the use of IRV in Ann Arbor was killed.  It was one of the
only Ann Arbor elections where more Republicans than Democrats
went to the polls -- maybe specifically to kill this more fair
form of voting. 

The time has come for Ann Arbor to reclaim its heritage as a city
capable of dealing fairly with multiple parties in elections, and
to lead the way for other municipalities around Michigan to learn
what it is like to really vote one's preferences. 


More information: 

Web:
  www.fairvote.org
  www.instantrunoff.com
  www.migreens.org
Phone:
  Huron Valley Greens: 734-663-3555


[Many thanks to John Gear, Policy Analyst for the Center for
Voting and Democracy, for much of the information in this
article.  And thanks also to Benjamin Walter, former Ann Arbor
resident, who researched Ann Arbor News articles from the
mid-1970's.]

Green Party of Michigan: www.migreens.org

www.migreens.org/hvgreens/irv-agen.htm
Last Updated on 8/26/2001
by Craig Harvey harvey@ic.net