Next
Tuesday, Primary Day, Maine voters go to the polls. That might make
you think of the nature of elections, and that question will be on
the ballot in November, when Mainers next vote.
Voters
will then be asked if they want to replace the traditional Maine
voting system, under which the person with the most votes is the
winner, by a more complicated “ranked choice” system, under which
second, third and even later choice votes count.
Right
now, 39 states use the same system as Maine. Even if the person with
the most votes does not gain more than half the votes, that person is
elected. The remaining 11 states use a run-off in which the top two
candidates in the first round run again.
No
state uses ranked choice voting. As much as Maine, proud of its
Dirigo motto, would like to lead, perhaps this time the wisdom of
others should be heeded.
The
ranked choice proposal appears to have arisen because of the 2010 and
2014 races for governor. Republican Paul LePage won both elections
with less than half the votes, because his Democratic and independent
opponents split the remaining votes.
While
this has occurred many times in previous Maine elections without
causing much concern, LePage’s highly controversial performance has
caused some voters to regret their failure to unite, blocking his
election. Supposedly, ranked choice voting might have automatically
created anti-LePage unity.
The
proposal’s backers may have the 2018 U.S. Senate race in mind.
Sen. Angus King, running as an independent, could face LePage and a
Democrat. A split vote might again open the way for LePage.
The
driving idea behind the ranked choice voting proposal is that public
officials should be chosen by a majority of the voters. The key
weakness of the proposal is that the winner could still not be chosen
by a majority of the voters.
The
winner could be everybody’s second choice and nobody’s first
choice.
In
fact, ranked choice voting could result in a winner who had no first
place votes beating a candidate who just missed having an outright
majority.
The
system would allow a collection of first, second and third place
votes for one candidate to edge out a candidate that had won the most
first place votes. That might work in picking your favorite color
but not a government leader, who must have more than a single
characteristic.
If
Mainers felt it was so important to have a person elected by an
absolute majority, the state could adopt a run-off system, used in
other states. The top two candidates in the first round would face
each other in the second round with the person elected having a clear
majority.
In
that way, the run-off election would give the voters a clear choice
not muddled by the counting of second, third and lower preferences.
The run-off campaign would real and live with candidates forced to
confront one another, not one carried out remotely on a computer.
The
arguments against a run-off are that it would cost more or have a
smaller turnout. The relatively small cost of the second round seems
worth it, and the recent Lewiston mayoral run-off did not lose voter
turnout.
Or
the California system could be used. Party primaries have been
replaced there by a single all-party primary with the two top vote
getters meeting in the general election. That involves no added
cost.
Ranked
choice voting in Maine has three serious drawbacks. First, it is
confusing and the voters’ choices can be unclear and manipulated in
a multi-candidate election.
Second,
it is questionable if ranked choice voting, even if approved by the
voters, would be constitutional. Maine Attorney General Janet Mills
has responded to an official legislative request that it raises
“significant constitutional concerns.”
If
it passed, it almost certainly would not be applied until after the
Maine Supreme Court considered if it were constitutional. If it
weren’t, then the Constitution would have to be amended, requiring
a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and a referendum.
Finally,
it’s like using a cannon to swat a fly – changing the voting
system because you don’t like LePage.
Other
less confusing and complicated ways can be used to ensure that the
likelihood of minority governors is reduced. Some require little or
no legislative change.
The
campaign on ranked choice voting has already begun. The election
next week is a good time to start thinking about the November vote.
The proposal may sound good, but there’s less there than meets the
eye.
No comments:
Post a Comment