OpEdNews Op Eds

Instant Runoff Voting touted as way to eliminate recounts

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Supporters of instant runoff voting are touting the method as a way to eliminate election recounts, according to a recent op ed in a Minnesota paper. The argument is that if the state used IRV, the Franken/Coleman contest would not need a recount. Sorry, but getting rid of a key component of election transparency isn't a good idea. Further, the claim that IRV "totally eliminates the need for a recount" is false.   Iit doesn't work that way, and its a bad idea.

It disturbs me alot when I see a piece in a major news paper praising the idea of eliminating election recounts. But I bet that the voting vendors would love the idea -especially Diebold, whose software turns out to have a flaw that "sometimes" subtracts or erases votes. 

Recounts are necessary in a healthy democracy. Without recounts, or the possibility (threat) of recounts, there can be no transparency in elections.

Your View: Instant runoff cheaper than recount Mankato Free Press, MN - ...Second, would be to institute IRV voting - this is instant runoff voting or ranked voting. This totally eliminates the need for a recount. ...

The claim that IRV "totally eliminates the need for a recount" is flat out false!

If an election is close enough, a recount can and will be called, unless the standards for recounts are thrown away! Recounts are necessary and desirable for healthy, transparent and open elections.

A fine example would be the IRV experiment in Cary, North Carolina City Council election in October 2007. The election was really close:

Recount widens Frantz lead in Cary October 12, 2007 "A double-checking of votes today in Cary's razor-thin District B Town Council election showed that Don Frantz appears to be the unofficial winner after all...

The ballots ended up being recounted because of mistakes made in the tallying. (IRV is hard to count)

"Critics Take Runoff Concerns to Elections Board" NBC 17 Tuesday, Oct 30, 2007 - 07:29

...What IRV does is violate one of the basic principals of election integrity, which is simplicity," said Perry Woods, a political consultant in Cary.

He says a small glitch threw everything into turmoil.
Basically, someone counted the same group of votes twice; the error was caught, and corrected after an audit.

Woods says his problem is with how they conducted that audit.
"In this case, they ended up recounting all the ballots again and calling it an audit," said Woods. "I felt like if they were doing that, the public should have been involved, so no doubt is there."

What IRV DOES do is make manual recounts extremely expensive, slow, and error prone.

Why IS instant runoff so hard to count? Because IRV is not additive. There is no such thing as a "subtotal" in IRV. In IRV every single vote may have to be sent individually to the central agency... each individual ballot has to be considered when deciding which ones advance to the "next round". The ballots cannot be counted at the polling places so it opens the door to wholesale fraud and error due to the complexity and need for centralization of the required tabulation process.

I am not opposed to a voting method that is simple to count and fair and monotonic and solves the spoiler problem, etc. But IRV is not simple to count, and it is "non monotonic", meaning that you can hurt your preferred candidate by voting for him or her! Many alternative voting methods solve the spoiler issue completely (unlike IRV and STV that do not solve the spoiler problem) and also still let voters fully express their voting preferences - i.e. do not seem to have any first amendment issues, equal treatment issues, or fairness issues.

 

http://votingnews.blogspot.com

Editor of the Voting News. The Voting News is a free national newsletter about election integrity issues, voting machines, election fraud, voter access and legislation in United States and international news.


Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

McCain's Absentee Ballot Mailer Fiasco Spreads - Could Disqualify Some Voters

New: Fake Voter Registration Letter in Florida Misleads Voters

Voting News: Voter roll flaws impact 1 in 10 voters. Voters sue to count 12, 563 RivCo ballots

Voting News: WV 1st in military internet voting. Boise U internet election voided. DC voting rights. ACORN's epitaph

Voting News: Vote flipping in Indiana, Maryland, Penn. 10,000 calls to 866OURVOTE

Voting News: Beware Absentee Ballots. Judge nixes Sarasota audits. OR online primary hype

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 people are discussing this page, with 4 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

That's just a mathematical fact. IRV increases... by Clay Shentrup on Saturday, Dec 13, 2008 at 7:37:09 PM
If you say it.  Prove it!Let our opinions be ... by John Roland on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:31:30 AM
Regardless of the election method used, if the ini... by Stephen Unger on Sunday, Dec 14, 2008 at 1:58:48 PM
I think that we should have IRV or STV as a useful... by Keith Mothersson on Monday, Dec 15, 2008 at 5:49:06 PM