[EM] San Francisco OKs Instant Runoffs

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

San Francisco OKs Instant Runoffs

By MARGIE MASON

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - San Francisco has become the first major U.S. city to 
adopt instant runoffs for nearly all municipal races, a move that is 
encouraging fringe candidates - always a boisterous voice here - to think 
they may actually have a chance on Election Day. 

Currently, if no candidate for a city office gets more than 50 percent of the 
vote, a runoff is held weeks or months later between the top two 
vote-getters. 

The new instant system would avoid this second round of balloting by allowing 
the voters to rank candidates as their first, second and third choice. Those 
preferences would be used to pick a winner. 

The idea won 55 percent approval from San Francisco voters on March 5. 

Opponents have criticized it as undemocratic and confusing. Proponents have 
said it will open the political process to more outsiders and save money, 
since runoffs cost taxpayers about $1.6 million each. 

``It will benefit the city in terms of the millions of dollars it will save 
and also the wear and tear on the department of elections,'' said Mark Leno, 
a member of the city Board of Supervisors. ``It will encourage greater voter 
participation.'' 

The concept has been used for decades in Ireland and Australia. London 
recently elected its mayor using the system, and Cambridge, Mass., has been 
electing City Council members through instant runoffs since 1941. 

In Vermont, where the Legislature steps in and picks the winner if no one 
gets a majority for governor, lieutenant governor and treasurer, 51 
communities recently approved nonbinding resolutions in favor of instant 
runoffs. Alaska will have a referendum on the ballot this fall. 

The San Francisco system will be different from the one in Cambridge, where 
voters pick from a slate of candidates to fill multiple slots - a method that 
makes it possible to win with only 10 percent of the vote. 

In San Francisco, the process will be used for most major city offices, 
including mayor, sheriff, treasurer, district attorney, public defender and 
Board of Supervisors. The counting method will kick in whenever a candidate 
fails to get a majority. 

Under the system, the candidate with the least number of votes is eliminated, 
and the second choices of voters who selected this loser are added to the 
tallies of the remaining candidates. If this does not create a majority 
winner, the process is repeated: The third choices of voters whose first and 
second choices have been eliminated are applied to the remaining candidates, 
and so on, until someone gets a majority. 

Chris Bowman, a Republican political consultant and former member of the San 
Francisco citizens advisory committee on elections, said the process goes 
against the ``one man, one vote'' principle. 

``I see it as undemocratic. There may be challenges made in court,'' he said. 

While Democrats have long dominated city politics, San Francisco voters also 
have a soft spot for fringe candidates, giving Green Party presidential 
candidate Ralph Nader half as many votes as George W. Bush in 2000. 

The new system could give some lesser-known candidates a boost against 
incumbents or other leading politicians. 

``It's the Green Party's agenda. They believe it will give the Greens more 
leverage in controlling the outcome of the elections and controlling the 
government,'' Bowman said. 

The Center for Voting and Democracy, a think tank in suburban Washington, 
funneled $50,000 of the $70,000 raised in support of the proposition, said 
Caleb Kleppner of the center's San Francisco chapter. As of Feb. 16, 
opponents reported contributing $20,000. They are not required to report the 
entire amount spent until July 31. 

The Green Party was another big supporter, but Kleppner denied trying to 
secure an advantage for any particular party. Instant runoffs, he said, 
reduce campaign spending and produce better voter turnout because they 
require only one trip to the polls. 

The proposition also had support from California Assembly Majority Leader 
Kevin Shelley, a San Francisco Democrat, as well as the Democratic Party, the 
United Farm Workers, the San Francisco Labor Council and the AFL-CIO among 
others. 

The city probably will not have the system in place in time for the general 
election in November, because the necessary software must first be approved 
and installed, said elections supervisor Tammy Haygood. 

Supervisor Matt Gonzalez said voters and poll workers will have to be 
educated about the setup, especially after a series of vote counting foul-ups 
have shaken faith in the system. Last November, thousands of absentee ballots 
were secretly moved on Election Night and several ballot box lids were found 
floating in San Francisco Bay. 

``Its time has come,'' said Board of Supervisors President Tom Ammiano, a 
potential candidate for mayor after Willie Brown leaves office next year 
because of term limits. ``It allows someone with not the biggest pocketbook 
to be a player.''