[EM] Re: IRV bill on Washington State Governor's desk

[Bart Ingles]

James Green-Armytage wrote:
> James replying to Russ, on the subject of the relative feasibility of new
> methods...
 >
>>Actually, as simple as DMC/RAV is, it may still be too complicated for 
>>public acceptance within, say, the next 20 or 30 years. If so, I guess 
>>we're left with Approval.
> 
> 
> 	What exactly do you mean by that? That approval is the only method that
> is both immediately adoptable and better than the status quo? I'd suggest
> that IRV fits that category as well, especially if it allows for equal
> rankings. I still think that I'd rather have ER-IRV than approval.

I'd probably take ER-IRV(whole) if offered, but it doesn't seem to be on 
the table anywhere.  At least approval has the benefit of some highly 
credible advocates, much study, and fairly wide use in private elections.

I tend to see regular IRV as a step backward, at least in the U.S. or 
other places currently using Plurality, when considering the strategic 
implications of adopting it.  Although IRV may seem to be an improvement 
over Plurality in that IIA violations are reduced by roughly half (in 
situations not affected by nomination strategy), this doesn't imply a 
corresponding increase in third-party wins, or in true multiparty 
competition.  There doesn't seem to be much evidence of either.

On the other hand, adopting IRV would likely displace or delay more 
productive change.


> 	I think that Condorcet methods in general will have a better chance of
> becoming a public issue as IRV is used more often. If there are multiple
> cases of real elections where the IRV winner differs from the Condorcet
> winner, then I think that this could be used to make a case for Condorcet
> (or perhaps CWO-IRV) that large numbers of people will be able to
> understand.

Not likely to happen.  Where voting and nomination strategies prop up 
the two-party system, any possible IIA violations will be masked.  It 
might be possible in local elections such as San Francisco, but 
unfortunately SF's three-rank limit will have a similar affect.

I have a hard time accepting IRV as a first step in the direction of a 
better system.  Even if it were true, it would be hard to show that it's 
worth the delay compared to adopting the system you really want.