This is what happens after voters find out what instant runoff voting is really like. It doesn't work as advertised most of the time, and it isn't transparent to the voters. It is hard to trust a system that reallocates votes and which produces results that only academics and non profit directors understand. Another case of instant runoff voting/IRV being rejected once implemented.
by Curtis Wackerle, Aspen Daily News Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
The advisory question, although split nearly down the middle, will likely compel City Council to place a binding charter amendment question on a future ballot. IRV became the city’s voting method in the November 2007 election when voters supported the change by a 76 percent margin. IRV does away with runoff elections by allowing voters to rank their candidate preference. If no candidate gets majority support with the first count, lower-ranking candidates are eliminated with those voters’ votes assigned to their next highest choice. This process is repeated until there is a winner.
The system has been criticized by some for the complexity of how votes are counted in Aspen’s council races and for how it eliminates the chance for voters to get to know top candidates better in a runoff election.
Sign up to receive updates by email here: