The clamor for instant runoff voting seems to be getting more intense. I find most of the articles on either side to be tiresome, rarely offering anything substantial. Today's Duluth News Tribune had two articles on instant runoff voting (IRV):
"Instant runoff voting lessens impact of voters' choice"
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/116881/
and "Instant runoff voting would make Minnesotans vote count"
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/116769/
The latter is by David Durenberger, former Republican Senator, and David Schultz, a Hamline University professor. Even though their column is better written, I still don't see IRV "as broadening the appeal of major-party candidates and encouraging viable third-party candidates."
Suppose there are four candidates for a particular office and 11 voters. All the voters give only a first and a second choice. The results are
A 5/0
B 3/3 for D
C 2/2 for D
D 1/1 for B
Under IRV no candidate received a clear majority, and so Ds second choice is a vote for B. Now we have
A 5
B 4
C 2
and we still have no clear majority. If you feel up to it, see how many different scenarios you can come up with that give less than certain results.
IRV has been touted as the solution to many "ills", including "spoiler votes", more viability to third party candidates, preventing our current fiasco with Franken and Coleman, and on and on. In the latter case, suppose half of Barkeley's voters gave Franken as their second choice and half gave Coleman as their second choice?
I have long thought the "jungle primary" as used in some Southern states was a better alternative. All the candidates who file for an office are on the first ballot, regardless of party affiliation. If any candidate receives the majority, that race has been decided. If not, the candidates are ranked according to votes and those whose combined votes are greater than 50 percent, go on to the next election.
This does eliminate the "spoiler" candidates of open party primaries. That is, voters who gave neither a dime or some time to a party get to decide a party's candidates.
Many say we have poor turnout to elections and that repeated elections will be a burden on many. This is very strange from a nation that talks about the sacrifice of people in the military to defend our freedom but can't make the sacrifice of a small bit of time to vote to defend that same freedom.
