An Instant-Runoff Voting Petition for New York State

If you believe our countywide (here in Dutchess), statewide (across NYS), and presidential elections (for the U.S.) should be conducted with instant-runoff voting to be truly democratic, sign on to this petition and pass it along to all you know across New York (see FairVote.org).

As Thomas Friedman pointed out in his column in the March 23rd New York Times recommending instant-runoff voting, "alternative (instant-runoff) voting allows you to rank the independent candidate your No. 1 choice, and the Democrat or Republican No. 2; therefore, if the independent does not win, your vote is immediately transferred to your second choice; therefore, you have no fear that in voting for an independent you might help elect your real nightmare."
[see: www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/opinion/24friedman.html]

Fact: There is bipartisan support in our state legislature for instant-runoff voting-- state legislators of both parties like Krueger, Thiele, Perkins, Oppenheimer, Adams, Addabbo, Hassell-Thompson, Huntley, Savino, Squadron, and Lupardo have endorsed bills like A.7492/S.3589A, bipartisan legislation creating a pilot program to provide for an instant runoff voting method to be used in up to ten local governments selected by the state board of elections in election years 2011 and 2012, and A.3281/S.3584A, legislation establishing an instant runoff voting method for certain local elections for races with three or more candidates.
[see: www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A07492; www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S03589;
www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03281; www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S03584]

Fact: Instant-runoff voting is a proven system: major cities such as Oaklnd, Minneapolis, and Memphis use it, pro-IRV laws have passed in North Carolina and Colorado, and many major private associations use it, including student governments at nearly 60 college and universities.

Fact: City councils in Berkeley and San Leandro, California recently voted to implement IRV in their November elections, including a highly competitive mayoral vote in Oakland; San Francisco will soon also hold its seventh IRV election, and with other California cities (including Los Angeles, Long Beach, and San Jose) seriously talking about IRV, a change in statewide elections may soon be within reach.

Fact: In January, a charter commission in Portland, the biggest city in Maine, voted 9 to 1 to put instant runoff voting on the ballot in November, after hearing testimony from FairVote and a number of local reform advocates such as the League of Young Voters; the Portland Press Herald twice endorsed the commission's move, as did the Brunswick Times Record.

Fact: Saint Cloud State University has released a voter survey taken after the November 2009 debut of IRV in Minneapolis (MN) and the results are overwhelmingly positive after voters there initially adopted instant-runoff voting in 2006 by a nearly 2-to-1 ratio; a survey by North Carolina State University showed similarly positive numbers for IRV in Hendersonville (NC).

Fact: Instant-runoff voting has been used for decades to elect leaders in Ireland and Australia, and in February, the British House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to hold a national referendum in 2011 on adopting IRV (there called "the alternative vote") for its elections; the bill has to pass the House of Lords, but if it does, the United Kingdom will join New Zealand in allowing voters to decide how to elect their most powerful leaders; in the 1990s, New Zealanders voted to use proportional representation; in a referendum to take place next year they will choose between that system and IRV.

Fact: The use of instant-runoff voting for the Best Picture Oscar is garnering major attention (often with the name "preferential voting," as termed by Robert's Rules when recommending IRV); two former White House officials have written strong commentaries about the Oscars and their support for IRV: Republican Donald Marron in Stock Analyst and Democrat Hendrik Hertzberg in the New Yorker magazine's Talk of the Town; other major profiles ran in the New York Times and USA Today.

Send a letter today to all 25 of us in our County Legislature for action now on this-- to
[email protected] (see resolution below submitted Mar. 29th to our County Legislature's offices on this)-- and call our state legislature on this at (877) 255-9417-- and Congress at (800) 828-0498.

[The resolution (see below) submitted to our County Legislature strongly urges our state legislature to pass and our Governor to sign into law A.7492/S.3589A, bipartisan legislation creating a pilot program to provide for an instant runoff voting method to be used in up to ten local governments selected by the state board of elections in election years 2011 and 2012, and A.3281/S.3584A, legislation establishing an instant runoff voting method for certain local elections for races with three or more candidates-- and strongly urges the Dutchess County Board of Elections and New York State Board of Elections to make possible instant-runoff elections for Dutchess County Executive and state-level elections, and for Congress to make possible instant-runoff elections for President.]

Joel Tyner
Dutchess County Legislator, D. #11
County Legislator (Rhinebeck/Clinton)
324 Browns Pond Road
Staatsburg, NY 12580
Host of "The Real Majority Project" on WVKR 91.3 FM Fridays 5-6 pm
Host of "Common Sense" on WHVW 950 AM Saturdays 8-10 am
DutchessDemocracy.blogspot.com
[email protected]
(845) 876-2488

For more information see Fairvote.org or these two recent essays:

"The Oscar for Best Voting System Goes To..." by Rob Richie of FairVote.org [for Yes magazine]
http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/the-oscar-for-best-voting-system-goes-to

"Oscar's Instant Runoff" [March 2010 USA Today editorial]
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/03/our-opinion-oscars-instant-runoff-.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[send a letter now to all 25 of us at [email protected] for this to be passed!]

WHEREAS, a growing number of voters resent the constraints of our dominant two-choice, two-party electoral system; it contributes to political gamesmanship, reinforces the power of established parties, and restricts the impact of independent candidates and voters, since voters are encouraged to choose the lesser of two evils rather than their preferred candidate, and

WHEREAS, Thomas Friedman in the March 23rd New York Times recommended instant-runoff voting (IRV), writing that, "alternative (instant-runoff) voting allows you to rank the independent candidate your No. 1 choice, and the Democrat or Republican No. 2; therefore, if the independent does not win, your vote is immediately transferred to your second choice; therefore, you have no fear that in voting for an independent you might help elect your real nightmare," and

WHEREAS, studies indicate that instant-runoff voting leads to significantly higher levels of voter participation and is well-understood and preferred by voters; instant-runoff voting allows darkhorse candidates a chance to make their case and to demonstrate their real levels of support, without results being skewed by fears of spoiling elections; it allows voters to truly vote for their hopes instead of their fears, and

WHEREAS, instant-runoff voting allows candidates to have a real opportunity to shape the debate and to win votes; it also motivates candidates to keep their campaigns on a higher road in terms of tone and substance in order to appeal to voters as a second choice; negative campaigning doesn't produce the same rewards under instant-runoff voting as it does under traditional elections, and

WHEREAS, instant-runoff voting is a proven system: major cities such as Oakland, Minneapolis, and Memphis use it, pro-IRV laws have passed in North Carolina and Colorado, and many major private associations use it, including student governments at nearly 60 college and universities, and

WHEREAS, city councils in Berkeley and San Leandro, California recently voted to implement IRV in their November elections, including a highly competitive mayoral vote in Oakland; San Francisco will soon also hold its seventh IRV election, and with other California cities (including Los Angeles, Long Beach, and San Jose) seriously talking about IRV, a change in statewide elections may soon be within reach, and

WHEREAS, in January, a charter commission in Portland, the biggest city in Maine, voted 9 to 1 to put instant runoff voting on the ballot in November, after hearing testimony from FairVote and a number of local reform advocates such as the League of Young Voters; the Portland Press Herald twice endorsed the commission's move, as did the Brunswick Times Record, and

WHEREAS, Saint Cloud State University has released a voter survey taken after the November 2009 debut of IRV in Minneapolis (MN) and the results are overwhelmingly positive after voters there initially adopted instant-runoff voting in 2006 by a nearly 2-to-1 ratio; a survey by North Carolina State University showed similarly positive numbers for IRV in Hendersonville (NC), and

WHEREAS, instant-runoff voting has been used for decades to elect leaders in Ireland and Australia, and in February, the British House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to hold a national referendum in 2011 on adopting IRV (there called "the alternative vote") for its elections; the bill has to pass the House of Lords, but if it does, the United Kingdom will join New Zealand in allowing voters to decide how to elect their most powerful leaders; in the 1990s, New Zealanders voted to use proportional representation; in a referendum to take place next year they will choose between that system and IRV, and

WHEREAS, the use of instant-runoff voting for the Best Picture Oscar is garnering major attention (often with the name "preferential voting," as termed by Robert's Rules when recommending IRV); two former White House officials have written strong commentaries about the Oscars and their support for IRV: Republican Donald Marron in StockAnalyst and Democrat Hendrik Hertzberg in the New Yorker magazine's Talk of the Town; other major profiles ran in the New York Times and USA Today, and
therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the Dutchess County Legislature strongly urges our state legislature to pass and our Governor to sign into law A.7492/S.3589A, bipartisan legislation creating a pilot program to provide for an instant runoff voting method to be used in up to ten local governments selected by the state board of elections in election years 2011 and 2012, and A.3281/S.3584A, legislation establishing an instant runoff voting method for certain local elections for races with three or more candidates, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Dutchess County Legislature strongly urges the Dutchess County Board of Elections and New York State Board of Elections to make possible instant-runoff elections for Dutchess County Executive and state-level elections, and for Congress to make possible instant-runoff elections for President, and be it further

RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Dutchess County Board of Elections, New York State Board of Elections, Governor David Paterson, State Senators Vincent Leibell and Stephen Saland, Assemblymembers Greg Ball, Kevin Cahill, Joel Miller, Marcus Molinaro, and Frank Skartados, President Barack Obama, Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer, and Representatives John Hall, Maurice Hinchey, and Scott Murphy.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/the-oscar-for-best-voting-system-goes-to

The Oscar for Best Voting System Goes To...
There's a new method for choosing Best Picture this year: instant runoff voting, a system that would also make political elections more fair.

by Rob Richie
posted Mar 05, 2010

A growing number of Americans resent the constraints of our dominant two-choice, two-party electoral system. It contributes to political gamesmanship in Washington, reinforces the power of established parties, and restricts the impact of independent candidates and voters, since voters are encouraged to choose the lesser of two evils rather than their preferred candidate.

So where can we turn? Surprisingly, part of the answer lies in Hollywood. The Academy of Motion Pictures and the Producers Guild of America are using a new method for selecting 2009s Best Picture: instant runoff voting.

Last year, the Academy decided to nominate ten movies for best picture rather than five, as it did until 1943. But it wanted to make sure the final winner was representative of majority opinion among Academy voterstheoretically, an unpopular movie could still win a simple plurality vote if only eleven percent of voters picked it.

Enter instant runoff voting (IRV, also known as ranked choice voting). Academy voters this year ranked the ten nominated movies from their favorite to least favorite in order of preference, one to ten. Those rankings are being tallied according to an American Idol kind of algorithm. Every voter has one and only one vote, but they indicate their backup choices in case their first choice cant win. In each round, the movie with the fewest votes is eliminated, and that movies backers have their vote added to the totals of their next ranked choice. This continues in a series of instant runoffs until the winner gains a majority of votes.

For the Oscars, that means the best picture wont go to a movie that might lead in first choices, but which most Oscar voters see as undeserving. Instead, a movie will need to do well enough in first choices to stay in the running, but also keep building support as weaker movies are eliminated. At the end of the day, the winning movie will be more likely to be the consensus choice.

Oscar elections are headline-grabbingthe New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today (with an interactive animation) all ran profiles of the Oscars use of IRVbut whats even more exciting is the prospect of similar changes in the way we choose our elected leaders. There, IRV can have a truly transformational impact, ensuring that a majority of voters actually support winning candidates and encouraging the growth of third parties by solving the spoiler problem (most famously illustrated by Ralph Naders 2000 presidential campaign, which tipped the race away from Al Gore).

IRV is still a winner-take-all voting system that doesnt represent political minorities; it wont fully provide the fair representation we should keep fighting for. But IRV does allow darkhorse candidates a chance to make their caseand to demonstrate their real levels of support, without results being skewed by fears of spoiling elections.

Its a proven system: major cities such as Oakland, Minneapolis, and Memphis use it, pro-IRV laws have passed in North Carolina and Colorado, and many major private associations use it, including student governments at nearly 60 college and universities.

City councils in Berkeley, Oakland, and San Leandro, California recently voted to implement IRV in their November elections, including a highly competitive mayoral vote in Oakland. San Francisco will also hold its seventh IRV election, and with other California citiesincluding Los Angeles, Long Beach, and San Joseseriously talking about IRV, a change in statewide elections may soon be within reach. IRV has also made headway in Vermont, Maine, Massachusetts, and Minnesota at both the city and state level.

IRV is gaining proponents around the world. It has been used for decades to elect leaders in Ireland and Australia. In February, the British House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to hold a national referendum in 2011 on adopting IRV (there called "the alternative vote") for its elections. The bill has to pass the House of Lords, but if it does, the United Kingdom will join New Zealand in allowing voters to decide how to elect their most powerful leaders (in the 1990s, New Zealanders voted to use proportional representation; in a referendum to take place next year they will choose between that system and IRV).

IRV has had to play defense as well. Frustrated losers in mayoral and county executive races in Pierce County, Washington, Burlington, Vermont, and Aspen, Colorado all led efforts in the past year to repeal IRV. With a state law change solving the spoiler issue in a different way in Pierce County, voters there repealed IRV in 2009. In Burlington, IRV was repealed by a narrow margin in a low turnout race that many saw as a referendum on an unpopular mayor who had been the only candidate ever to win an IRV election there.

Of course, IRV is not the only election reform thats necessary; other ideas for fairer elections are also generating energy and excitement. Following the Supreme Courts Citizens United ruling, which opened the door for huge increases in corporate spending in politics, broad and influential coalitions working toward constitutional change. Meanwhile, the filibuster rule in the Senate looks increasingly vulnerable, universal voter registration is gaining growing support, and the National Popular Vote plan for president continues its state-by-state progress toward effectively sidelining the Electoral College.

Change breeds change, and the 2010s are promising to be a decade of reform. Stay tuned on Oscar night!

Rob Richie wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Rob is the executive director of FairVote, a non-profit organization that researches and advocates election reforms that increase voter turnout, accountable governance, and fair representation.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/03/our-opinion-oscars-instant-runoff-.html ...

Oscar's instant runoff

The big change you'll notice at Sunday's Academy Awards ceremony is that the year's best picture will be chosen from among 10 nominees, up from five in previous years.

As moviegoers might have guessed, the shift wasn't caused by a 100\% increase in the number of deserving movies. (Don't confuse Up with Up in the Air, and what was An Education about, anyway?) It was a marketing and ratings ploy. It also raised the possibility that, under the "winner takes all" voting system used for the past 65 years, a nominee could triumph with, say, 11\% of the vote.

To avert that unlikely but troubling prospect, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences decided to choose the best picture based on a system known as preferential voting. Voters rank their choices of films in order of preference, clearing the way for an instant runoff.

Here's how it works: If no film receives a majority of first-choice votes in the first round, the one that receives the fewest votes is eliminated. The second-choice votes are then counted and distributed towards the remaining vote total, and so on until a film attains more than 50\% of the vote.

Typically, Hollywood and politics don't mix very well. In this case, however, what makes sense for Tinseltown also makes sense for promoting majority rule in state and local elections with crowded fields.

At least six cities, including Minneapolis and San Francisco, and two states are already using forms of instant runoff voting. Seven more cities plan to implement it this November or next.
The advantages are numerous. Costly runoffs, with anemic turnout, are avoided. Fringe candidates are less likely to be elected when mainstream candidates split the vote. Campaigns can be more civil because candidates looking for second-choice as well as first-choice votes don't want to alienate a rival's supporters.


We don't know whether Avatar's Na'vi have adopted such an enlightened method for choosing leaders on the moon Pandora. And we think 10 nominees for best picture is about five too many. But in picking a clever way to separate the winner from the also-rans, the Academy might have struck a blow for election reform. That's precious.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S03584 ...

S03584 Summary:
BILL NO S03584A

SAME AS No same as

SPONSOR KRUEGER

COSPNSR ADAMS, ADDABBO, HASSELL-THOMPSON, HUNTLEY, OPPENHEIMER, PERKINS,
SAVINO, SQUADRON

MLTSPNSR

Add Art 18 SS18-100 - 18-110, El L

Establishes an instant runoff voting method for certain local elections for
races with three or more candidates; insures majority support for elected
officers.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03281 ...

A03281 Summary:
BILL NO A03281A

SAME AS No same as

SPONSOR Kavanagh

COSPNSR Lupardo

MLTSPNSR

Add Art 18 SS18-100 - 18-110, El L

Establishes an instant runoff voting method for certain local elections for
races with three or more candidates; insures majority support for elected
officers.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S03589 ...

S03589 Summary:
BILL NO S03589A

SAME AS Same as A 7492-A

SPONSOR KRUEGER

COSPNSR HASSELL-THOMPSON, HUNTLEY, PERKINS, SAVINO, SQUADRON

MLTSPNSR

Creates a pilot program to provide for an instant runoff voting method to be
used in up to ten local governments, selected by the state board of elections,
in election years 2011 and 2012; requires report to state legislature.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A07492 ...

A07492 Summary:
BILL NO A07492A

SAME AS Same as S 3589-A

SPONSOR Thiele

COSPNSR

MLTSPNSR

Creates a pilot program to provide for an instant runoff voting method to be
used in up to ten local governments, selected by the state board of elections,
in election years 2011 and 2012; requires report to state legislature.