[EM] Approval-Runoff

[Andy Jennings]

>
> This was a very good idea, it sounds like. So how did it get shoved aside?
> It would be quite useful to know.
>

It didn't even get a hearing in the rules committee of the Arizona house of
representatives.  I think the chairman of the rules committee may have been
against it.  I heard that a prominent AZ Republican strategist opposes
approval voting because it would be "bad for conservatives".

I think it may be bad for the most extreme candidates, but in a place like
Arizona, I think it would be a slight positive for conservatives in
general.  (Since Arizona leans conservative, I think conservatives are the
most likely to be hurt by vote splitting and spoiler effects.)


> Does the law require a primary and runoff regardless of what happens in
> the primary? This seems a bit strange combined with the rest of what you
> wrote. If a majority found in the primary is adequate to declare a winner,
> no runoff, then there would be cost savings, if the required extra votes
> came from extra approvals.
>

The Arizona Constitution says, "The Legislature shall enact a direct
primary election law, which shall provide for the nomination of candidates
for all elective State, county, and city offices, including candidates for
United States Senator and for Representative in Congress..."

I believe this (in conjunction with existing statutes) is interpreted to
mean top-two runoff in nonpartisan situations, but if someone gets 50% in
the first round they can indeed omit the runoff.  I'm not sure how often
that runoff round has no other races and could actually save the entire
expense of an election.

~ Andy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120315/5c836665/attachment-0003.htm>