RE: [ei] Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and isstill glad
0 views
Skip to first unread message
r...@fairvote.org
Oct 26, 2009, 11:51:36 AM10/26/09
to election...@googlegroups.com, r...@fairvote.org
We will see how glad Cary is and what kind of turnout is earned in their
runoff soon enough.
Joyce, I am aware of the "fair and balanced" approach you take to your
coverage of instant runoff voting in your Voting News (remind me if you
linked to the endorsements in the past 8 days for local instant runoff
voting ballot measures in the Seattle Times, Tacoma News Tribune and
Minneapolis Star Tribune), but the 2008 poll in Cary is overwhelmingly
strong evidence that people in Cary preferred IRV after its first elections
with it to traditional runoffs. An absolute majority rated it 9 on a scale
of 1 to 9, and those polled were ten times more likely to give it a 7 to 9
than a 1 to 3. (The latter was about 7%).
At the same time, a number of people didn't vote in the 2007 city
elections, as is normal for local races, and some Cary residents not
understanding it is not a surprise. It's also true that a comparable number
might say they don't understand other aspects of our voting and counting
processes (how absentee votes are handled, say), but still can cast a fully
effective ballot by following the instructions on the ballot -- as is the
case with IRV.
Note that I wasn't saying "Republican majority" city for Cary as an
aspersion, but to indicate that IRV can gain strong support across the
spectrum.
Rob
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Joyce McCloy ncv...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 07:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
To: Election...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ei] Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and
isstill glad
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and is still
glad
Rob Richie is doing his hard sell of Instant Runoff Voting again,
claiming that poor, poor Cary North Carolina will have to suffer a one-
to-one traditional runoff election. (All because they rejected IRV
after using it once in 2007). How dare the little ole' city of Cary,
North Carolina ignore the good advice of FairVote and Rob Richie,
carpet-baggers er I mean uh academics who are smarter, better
informed? Cary only has the most PHDs per capita for cities with
population over 75,000. (http://www.comevisitcary.com/ ) What could
they possibly know? Now Rob Richie is blaming the decision on
politics, calling Cary, NC, a "Republican-leaning city." But FairVote
loved Cary so much until this year. Using FairVote logic, can we
assume that using IRV turned Cary into a "Republican-leaning city"?
May I inject an "LOL" here?
What Rob Richie doesn't tell you is that no one in Cary is
complaining, and voters are looking forward to the face off. The field
has been narrowed from 4 candidates to 2. The only trauma is for Rob
Richie, who uses any adoption of IRV as a "victory" to use to persuade
other places to adopt it. He's seeing defeat as places continue to
ditch IRV or are considering ditching it.
http://instantrunoff.blogspot.com/2009/06/places-that-have-ditched-instant-r
unoff.html
Anyway, this blog is correct the claim that "Runoff misery" is
building support for Instant Runoff Voting in Cary North Carolina. We
will also clarify some other issues. Here's Rob Richie's headline
which has already caused some people to email me and ask "what
universe is RR living in?".
Runoff misery from New York City to Cary (NC) builds support for
instant runoff voting October 10th, 2009. Rob Richie ...Cary’s city
council voted to try IRV in 2007, and its voters overwhelmingly
supported it.
http://www.fairvote.org/blog/2009/10/runoff-mysery-from-new-york-city-to-car
y-nc-build-support-for-instant-runoff-voting/
There's no misery in North Carolina. The misery is all Rob Richies.
What really happened in 2007 and what have we learned since then? In
2007, the Wake County NC Board of Elections voted to volunteer for the
IRV pilot. The City Council made a quick decision to give it a try.
Cary voters were not involved in the decision and there was definite
controversy after the decision was made. Two years later, Cary
considered the matter again, and held several public meetings. see
Cary NC tries IRV, then says ‘no more’
(
http://votingmatters.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/cary-nc-tries-irv-then-says-no
-more/)
At Cary NC's City Council meeting on April 30, 2009, Cary City Council
member Don Frantz reflected on the problem with the 2007 decision. He
said:
"When our town agreed to IRV in 2007, it was kind of rush job..There
was a lot of pushback, the public wasn’t involved …"
http://irvbad4nc.blogspot.com/2009/05/instant-runoff-voting-retreats-in-nort
h.html
Rob Richie continues:
More than 70% of voters preferred IRV to their former runoff system in
a North Carolina State exit poll, and a full poll conducted by Cary in
2008 affirmed an overwhelming preference for using IRV again rather
than keeping the traditional runoff system — indeed, on a scale of to
9, with 1 being most opposed to 9 being most in favor, 67.1%indicated
a 7 or higher (including 51% indicating the highest level of 9) while
only 6.9% indicated 3 or less.
But liking does not = understanding. And a significant number of Cary
voters did not understand instant runoff voting. When 22% just don't
understand IRV at all, then it is just another glorified butterfly
ballot, or a literacy test, 21st century style. Rob Richie also
doesn't tell you how a FairVote employee admitted slanting the exit
polling in Cary - see Slanting the exit poll of Cary's instant runoff
voting election (IRV America Director quoted)
http://instantrunoff.blogspot.com/2009/08/slanting-exit-poll-of-carys-instan
t.html
Cary's Bi-Annual Survey says: 22% polled did not understand IRV at
all.
See Instant Runoff Voting Not So Good Polls: Cary NC, Hendersonville
NC, Pierce Co WA, and San Francisco
(
http://irvbad4nc.blogspot.com/2009/10/instant-runoff-voting-not-so-good-poll
s.html
)
The results of Cary NC’s 2008 bi-annual citizen survey indicate that a
significant percent of voters do not understand IRV. The mean was 5.83
with 58.6% on the “understand” side (above 5) of the scale and 30.6%
on the “not understand” side (Figure 19). This includes 22.0% who
indicated they do not understand at all. Overall this indicates a
degree of misunderstanding among the respondents.
(http://www.townofcary.org/depts/pio/biennialsurvey/html/
2008BiennialSurveyReport.htm)
Keep in mind that Cary is the city with the most Ph.D.s per capita in
the U.S. for towns larger than 75,000 people.
Rob Richie again:
"Furthermore, the county’s board of elections indicated its support
for administering its new system, reporting that it saved more than
$20,000 by avoiding a second-round runoff in one city council race. "
Of course the Wake County Board of Elections supported Instant Runoff
Voting. The (then), now former Chairman of the Wake BoE was a active
advocate of instant runoff voting. he even traveled to Minnesota to
support IRV to a MN State Legislative Committee. (http://
www.mnvoters.org/PPirvprocon.htm)
His daughter-in-law, Elena Everett was the Director of Instant Runoff
Voting, FairVote NC and worked very hard to promote IRV.
(http://www.fairvote.org/index.php/
presidentialpage=59&articlemode=showspecific&showarticle=3118 )
While both are good people, they could hardly be objective.
Rob Richie continues:
"...The result in Cary fall on the heels of controversy stirred up in
New York City by a hugely expensive, citywide runoff last month that
was marked by bitter attacks between candidates before the runoff and
a turnout of less than 8% of registered Democrats deciding two
nominees...."
Want to know what Don Frantz, Cary City Council member has to say
about this current election? (Frantz was elected by the one contest
where IRV votes were counted in North Carolina in 2007.) From the Cary
Politics message board, Don Frantz answers a poster's question - does
Don regret ditching IRV:
Re: Oct 6 2009 Election Predictions
Quote: Originally Posted by ncary42long
Don F, would you reconsider IRV again if Jennifer loses the runoff,
knowing that she would have had a greater chance of winning this
election with it? Just curious. Ruth
Why ask me?
Ask all of council as we are the ones who decided to not utilize IRV
in Cary elections.But my answer is "no". I do not like instant runoff
voting and have given my reasons as to why many times. I'll take in
elections over funny math and 30% voter confusion any day. You also
assume the initial results would be the same if IRV had been utilized.
I don't believe that would be the case. __________________Don
(Posted at CaryPolitics discussion forum
http://carypolitics.org/forums/showpost.phps=a7e7b6e039d3c6cffda1977dc0f3296
6&p=56760&postcount=37
)
Don Frantz was the candidate running for Cary City Council in 2007
whose contest was decided by the IRV votes in the 2nd and 3rd round.
He is the only candidate in the state whose election outcome was
decided by IRV. Don described his face to face experience explaining
IRV to voters:
USA Today. Oct 17, 2007 To stem runoff votes, new ballots have voters
rank top 3
Winning candidate Frantz said he heard from many confused voters on
thecampaign trail ."I found myself, when I was at some places, that's
all I was doing …explaining the new voting system," he said.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-10-17%20Runoff_N.htm
So please everyone remember, the outrage is all Rob Richie's and not
that of Cary, North Carolina's. For further reading enjoyment, read
How FairVote IRV propaganda has been very effective also read (more
current) Responding to Rob Richie, IRV advocate
http://www.mail-archive.com/election...@lists.electorama.com/msg03065.h
tml
http://groups.google.com/group/ElectionIntegrity/browse_thread/thread/8acec8
9ea8c5ed48/7ed500d2be9a2581?hl=en#7ed500d2be9a2581
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
runoff soon enough.
Joyce, I am aware of the "fair and balanced" approach you take to your
coverage of instant runoff voting in your Voting News (remind me if you
linked to the endorsements in the past 8 days for local instant runoff
voting ballot measures in the Seattle Times, Tacoma News Tribune and
Minneapolis Star Tribune), but the 2008 poll in Cary is overwhelmingly
strong evidence that people in Cary preferred IRV after its first elections
with it to traditional runoffs. An absolute majority rated it 9 on a scale
of 1 to 9, and those polled were ten times more likely to give it a 7 to 9
than a 1 to 3. (The latter was about 7%).
At the same time, a number of people didn't vote in the 2007 city
elections, as is normal for local races, and some Cary residents not
understanding it is not a surprise. It's also true that a comparable number
might say they don't understand other aspects of our voting and counting
processes (how absentee votes are handled, say), but still can cast a fully
effective ballot by following the instructions on the ballot -- as is the
case with IRV.
Note that I wasn't saying "Republican majority" city for Cary as an
aspersion, but to indicate that IRV can gain strong support across the
spectrum.
Rob
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Joyce McCloy ncv...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 07:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
To: Election...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ei] Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and
isstill glad
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and is still
glad
Rob Richie is doing his hard sell of Instant Runoff Voting again,
claiming that poor, poor Cary North Carolina will have to suffer a one-
to-one traditional runoff election. (All because they rejected IRV
after using it once in 2007). How dare the little ole' city of Cary,
North Carolina ignore the good advice of FairVote and Rob Richie,
carpet-baggers er I mean uh academics who are smarter, better
informed? Cary only has the most PHDs per capita for cities with
population over 75,000. (http://www.comevisitcary.com/ ) What could
they possibly know? Now Rob Richie is blaming the decision on
politics, calling Cary, NC, a "Republican-leaning city." But FairVote
loved Cary so much until this year. Using FairVote logic, can we
assume that using IRV turned Cary into a "Republican-leaning city"?
May I inject an "LOL" here?
What Rob Richie doesn't tell you is that no one in Cary is
complaining, and voters are looking forward to the face off. The field
has been narrowed from 4 candidates to 2. The only trauma is for Rob
Richie, who uses any adoption of IRV as a "victory" to use to persuade
other places to adopt it. He's seeing defeat as places continue to
ditch IRV or are considering ditching it.
http://instantrunoff.blogspot.com/2009/06/places-that-have-ditched-instant-r
unoff.html
Anyway, this blog is correct the claim that "Runoff misery" is
building support for Instant Runoff Voting in Cary North Carolina. We
will also clarify some other issues. Here's Rob Richie's headline
which has already caused some people to email me and ask "what
universe is RR living in?".
Runoff misery from New York City to Cary (NC) builds support for
instant runoff voting October 10th, 2009. Rob Richie ...Cary’s city
council voted to try IRV in 2007, and its voters overwhelmingly
supported it.
http://www.fairvote.org/blog/2009/10/runoff-mysery-from-new-york-city-to-car
y-nc-build-support-for-instant-runoff-voting/
There's no misery in North Carolina. The misery is all Rob Richies.
What really happened in 2007 and what have we learned since then? In
2007, the Wake County NC Board of Elections voted to volunteer for the
IRV pilot. The City Council made a quick decision to give it a try.
Cary voters were not involved in the decision and there was definite
controversy after the decision was made. Two years later, Cary
considered the matter again, and held several public meetings. see
Cary NC tries IRV, then says ‘no more’
(
http://votingmatters.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/cary-nc-tries-irv-then-says-no
-more/)
At Cary NC's City Council meeting on April 30, 2009, Cary City Council
member Don Frantz reflected on the problem with the 2007 decision. He
said:
"When our town agreed to IRV in 2007, it was kind of rush job..There
was a lot of pushback, the public wasn’t involved …"
http://irvbad4nc.blogspot.com/2009/05/instant-runoff-voting-retreats-in-nort
h.html
Rob Richie continues:
More than 70% of voters preferred IRV to their former runoff system in
a North Carolina State exit poll, and a full poll conducted by Cary in
2008 affirmed an overwhelming preference for using IRV again rather
than keeping the traditional runoff system — indeed, on a scale of to
9, with 1 being most opposed to 9 being most in favor, 67.1%indicated
a 7 or higher (including 51% indicating the highest level of 9) while
only 6.9% indicated 3 or less.
But liking does not = understanding. And a significant number of Cary
voters did not understand instant runoff voting. When 22% just don't
understand IRV at all, then it is just another glorified butterfly
ballot, or a literacy test, 21st century style. Rob Richie also
doesn't tell you how a FairVote employee admitted slanting the exit
polling in Cary - see Slanting the exit poll of Cary's instant runoff
voting election (IRV America Director quoted)
http://instantrunoff.blogspot.com/2009/08/slanting-exit-poll-of-carys-instan
t.html
Cary's Bi-Annual Survey says: 22% polled did not understand IRV at
all.
See Instant Runoff Voting Not So Good Polls: Cary NC, Hendersonville
NC, Pierce Co WA, and San Francisco
(
http://irvbad4nc.blogspot.com/2009/10/instant-runoff-voting-not-so-good-poll
s.html
)
The results of Cary NC’s 2008 bi-annual citizen survey indicate that a
significant percent of voters do not understand IRV. The mean was 5.83
with 58.6% on the “understand” side (above 5) of the scale and 30.6%
on the “not understand” side (Figure 19). This includes 22.0% who
indicated they do not understand at all. Overall this indicates a
degree of misunderstanding among the respondents.
(http://www.townofcary.org/depts/pio/biennialsurvey/html/
2008BiennialSurveyReport.htm)
Keep in mind that Cary is the city with the most Ph.D.s per capita in
the U.S. for towns larger than 75,000 people.
Rob Richie again:
"Furthermore, the county’s board of elections indicated its support
for administering its new system, reporting that it saved more than
$20,000 by avoiding a second-round runoff in one city council race. "
Of course the Wake County Board of Elections supported Instant Runoff
Voting. The (then), now former Chairman of the Wake BoE was a active
advocate of instant runoff voting. he even traveled to Minnesota to
support IRV to a MN State Legislative Committee. (http://
www.mnvoters.org/PPirvprocon.htm)
His daughter-in-law, Elena Everett was the Director of Instant Runoff
Voting, FairVote NC and worked very hard to promote IRV.
(http://www.fairvote.org/index.php/
presidentialpage=59&articlemode=showspecific&showarticle=3118 )
While both are good people, they could hardly be objective.
Rob Richie continues:
"...The result in Cary fall on the heels of controversy stirred up in
New York City by a hugely expensive, citywide runoff last month that
was marked by bitter attacks between candidates before the runoff and
a turnout of less than 8% of registered Democrats deciding two
nominees...."
Want to know what Don Frantz, Cary City Council member has to say
about this current election? (Frantz was elected by the one contest
where IRV votes were counted in North Carolina in 2007.) From the Cary
Politics message board, Don Frantz answers a poster's question - does
Don regret ditching IRV:
Re: Oct 6 2009 Election Predictions
Quote: Originally Posted by ncary42long
Don F, would you reconsider IRV again if Jennifer loses the runoff,
knowing that she would have had a greater chance of winning this
election with it? Just curious. Ruth
Why ask me?
Ask all of council as we are the ones who decided to not utilize IRV
in Cary elections.But my answer is "no". I do not like instant runoff
voting and have given my reasons as to why many times. I'll take in
elections over funny math and 30% voter confusion any day. You also
assume the initial results would be the same if IRV had been utilized.
I don't believe that would be the case. __________________Don
(Posted at CaryPolitics discussion forum
http://carypolitics.org/forums/showpost.phps=a7e7b6e039d3c6cffda1977dc0f3296
6&p=56760&postcount=37
)
Don Frantz was the candidate running for Cary City Council in 2007
whose contest was decided by the IRV votes in the 2nd and 3rd round.
He is the only candidate in the state whose election outcome was
decided by IRV. Don described his face to face experience explaining
IRV to voters:
USA Today. Oct 17, 2007 To stem runoff votes, new ballots have voters
rank top 3
Winning candidate Frantz said he heard from many confused voters on
thecampaign trail ."I found myself, when I was at some places, that's
all I was doing …explaining the new voting system," he said.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-10-17%20Runoff_N.htm
So please everyone remember, the outrage is all Rob Richie's and not
that of Cary, North Carolina's. For further reading enjoyment, read
How FairVote IRV propaganda has been very effective also read (more
current) Responding to Rob Richie, IRV advocate
http://www.mail-archive.com/election...@lists.electorama.com/msg03065.h
tml
http://groups.google.com/group/ElectionIntegrity/browse_thread/thread/8acec8
9ea8c5ed48/7ed500d2be9a2581?hl=en#7ed500d2be9a2581
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
Joyce McCloy
Oct 26, 2009, 1:02:51 PM10/26/09
to Election Integrity
Rob Richie argues that alot of voters polled said they like IRV. That
Is like saying alot of voters liked the poll tax or literacy tests, so
lets use them! Or like the insurance companies saying "alot of people
like their current health insurance".
Anti-freeze tastes good but it is poison.
Everything I've learned about IRV convinces me that IRV is EXTREMELY
DAMAGING to election integrity and creates an increased dependence on
complex technology. IRV damages transparency to voters whether on
optical scan or touchscreen machine. IRV incentivizes more compext
technology and a form of IRV led to Scotland ditching hand counted
paper ballots for optical scanners.
SEE WHAT DR. REBECCA MERCURI, BRAD FRIEDMAN AND KATHY DOPP SAY ABOUT
IRV
DR REBECCA MERCURI warned about Scotland switching to a more
complicated vote counting method, ditching hand counted paper ballots
for optical scanners: "IRV and other proportional balloting methods
have been proven to incentivize the introduction of electronic ballot
tabulation in places where none previously was needed or has existed,
and they further complicate what has become an increasingly closed
process for the determination of election results."
http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/Dr_Rebecca_Mercuri_Instant_Runoff_Voting.pdf
BRAD FRIEDMAN, liberal blogger CALLS IRV A VIRUS
Blogged by Brad Friedman on 6/2/2009 1:38PM
'Instant Runoff Voting' (IRV) Election Virus Spreads to Los Angeles
County
Joins 'Internet Voting' and 'Vote-by-Mail' schemes as the latest bad
ideas poised to further cripple American democracy
PLUS: IRV count fails in Aspen's first instant runoff election...
...the last thing this county needs is to complicate the math even
further by confusing matters with IRV's complicate scheme of ranked
choice voting where voters are asked to select a first and second
place choices, etc.
For that matter, unless, and until, we can simplify our election
procedures such that any and all citizens are able to oversee and
verify the accuracy of their election results, no jurisdiction in this
country should employ schemes like IRV, no matter how well-meaning
supporters of it may be in hoping to allow a broader range of
candidates and parties to have a shot at winning an election.
Along with the emerging nightmares of Internet Voting and Vote-by-
Mail, IRV is yet another one of the horrible wack-a-mole schemes being
endlessly advanced by advocates and profiteers who put winning
elections and making money off them, over the idea of transparent,
verifiable, secure democracy and self-governance expressed of the
people, by the people and for the people....
...more at the link http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7198
KATHY DOPP "Realities Mar Instant Runoff - 18 Flaws and 3 Benefits
This report discusses flaws and benefits of instant runoff voting
(IRV) methods and shows how IRV
threatens the fairness, accuracy, timeliness, and economy of U.S.
elections.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf
FairVote's claims about IRV have gone unchallenged because so far IRV
has had minimal usage. I set up a website and blog just to help
educate the public about it. www.instantrunoffvoting.us I link to
news articles, studies and reports of actual usage of IRV, not talking
points.
IRV ADVOCATES DID TRY TO PUSH SAN FRANCISCO INTO TOUCHSCREENS FOR IRV
(but that's nothing compared to the complexity of the IRV tallying
algorithm used by both touchscreen and optical scan)
2003. The Los Angeles Voter Empowerment Circle recommended touch
screen voting machines for IRV to the state of California in 2003:
"touch screen machines for DRE systems are also better able to
ccommodate alternative voting methods such as Instant Runoff Voting.
We therefore believe that DRE systems are preferable to paper-based
systems, such as punch cards or optical scans.
http://www.instantrunoffvoting.us/votingsystems.html
IRV ADVOCATE ATTACKS CA SOS BOWEN (2007) Take a look at how Stephen
Hill, formerly with Fair Vote attacks California SOS Debra Bowen - in
a prominent California newspaper - for implementing security measures,
because they would slow down the IRV election in San Francisco:
S.F. supervisors blamed for blocking new voting system
John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, September 21, 2007
If it takes three weeks to count the votes in this November's
election, the Board of Supervisors should bear the blame, San
Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said Thursday...
… The tough restrictions put on the use of the company's voting system
in San Francisco are borderline ridiculous given how few people are
likely to run into the problems with the ink, said Steven Hill,
director of the political reform program of the New America
Foundation.
"We're talking about people who drop the pen they're given in the
voting booth, don't pick up the pen and then grab another pen without
black ink," he said. "That's a pretty small group."
Bowen "is basically throwing the book at ES&S, but it's the city
that's bearing the brunt of it," Hill said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/21/MN8ASA8T4.DTL
FAIRVOTE PARTNERS WITH VOTING VENDORS
Everyone Counts (E1C) has developed a very sophisticated online
election and survey product that handles multiple versions of ranked
ballot elections. E1C has allowed CVD to set up demonstration
elections with their system, and FairVote has partnered with E1C to
run private sector elections
http://fairvote.org/?page=1586
FAIRVOTE IS AN ELECTION VENDOR:
*and before FairVote scrubs this, note I've already made a screen
shot*
The Election Services Group
We perform your elections.
Since 1992, FairVote has been dedicated to fair elections where every
vote counts and
all voters are represented. As a catalyst for reform, we conduct
research, analysis, education and
advocacy to build understanding of and support for more democratic
voting systems.
Through our IRV America Program, we advocate instant runoff voting
(IRV) as an alternative to
plurality elections and traditional runoff elections. Our Election
Services Group (ESG) also consults
on electoral systems and implementation, with a focus on non-
governmental elections.
We provide full service consulting on all aspects of elections.
We have worked with organizations that include large companies,
small non-profit organizations and political parties. We are experts
in all aspects of elections,
including voting equipment, hardware, software, and procedures.
We can help you figure out the election solution that is right for
you.
Products
Simple Online, Electronic or by Mail IRV Vote: FairVote's Election
Services Group has
highlighted three options for implementing this method of IRV, as well
as the services and assistance
that we are able to provide.
Full Service Corporate Elections
General consulting on electoral design: Our consultants will work with
you to clarify the goals
of your election, select an appropriate electoral system.
Elections training: Our consultants will work with you to choose
balloting technologies that are right for you
and design any necessary voter education materials.
Referrals to technology providers: We are knowledgeable about election
technologies,
including mail voting, phone voting, Internet voting and hybrid
systems, and we can provide referrals
and recommendations about vendors.
Total solutions: We can assemble the necessary team to conduct all
aspects of an election at any scale.
Once you settle on the necessary parameters -- election design, voter
list, balloting technology and budget --
we will conduct the entire election from start to finish, from voter
education to certified election results.
Clients
ESG has had a wide clientele, including corporations, political
parties, and NGOs.
Our staff members have played key roles in providing technical
assistance with IRV
implementation in San Francisco, CA; Ferndale, MI; Burlington, VT;
Berkeley, CA and many other jurisdictions.
Sample
Download a sample voting system education presentation we created for
a client
For a list of clients or to discuss a project, please contact Program
Director David Moon at 301-270-4616
or dmoon(at)fairvote.org.
http://www.fairvote.org/?page=38
While FairVote may be pleased if 20-30% don't understand IRV, the city
council was NOT pleased.
While FairVote may be glad that a "majority polled" liked IRV, this is
no better than the argument that big insurance companies use that a
"majority polled" like their health insurance.
IF THE MAJORITY LIKES POLL TAXES, LITERACY TESTS, 3/5 VOTERS, DOES
THAT MAKE THEM A GOOD THING?
> From: Joyce McCloy ncvo...@gmail.com
Is like saying alot of voters liked the poll tax or literacy tests, so
lets use them! Or like the insurance companies saying "alot of people
like their current health insurance".
Anti-freeze tastes good but it is poison.
Everything I've learned about IRV convinces me that IRV is EXTREMELY
DAMAGING to election integrity and creates an increased dependence on
complex technology. IRV damages transparency to voters whether on
optical scan or touchscreen machine. IRV incentivizes more compext
technology and a form of IRV led to Scotland ditching hand counted
paper ballots for optical scanners.
SEE WHAT DR. REBECCA MERCURI, BRAD FRIEDMAN AND KATHY DOPP SAY ABOUT
IRV
DR REBECCA MERCURI warned about Scotland switching to a more
complicated vote counting method, ditching hand counted paper ballots
for optical scanners: "IRV and other proportional balloting methods
have been proven to incentivize the introduction of electronic ballot
tabulation in places where none previously was needed or has existed,
and they further complicate what has become an increasingly closed
process for the determination of election results."
http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/Dr_Rebecca_Mercuri_Instant_Runoff_Voting.pdf
BRAD FRIEDMAN, liberal blogger CALLS IRV A VIRUS
Blogged by Brad Friedman on 6/2/2009 1:38PM
'Instant Runoff Voting' (IRV) Election Virus Spreads to Los Angeles
County
Joins 'Internet Voting' and 'Vote-by-Mail' schemes as the latest bad
ideas poised to further cripple American democracy
PLUS: IRV count fails in Aspen's first instant runoff election...
...the last thing this county needs is to complicate the math even
further by confusing matters with IRV's complicate scheme of ranked
choice voting where voters are asked to select a first and second
place choices, etc.
For that matter, unless, and until, we can simplify our election
procedures such that any and all citizens are able to oversee and
verify the accuracy of their election results, no jurisdiction in this
country should employ schemes like IRV, no matter how well-meaning
supporters of it may be in hoping to allow a broader range of
candidates and parties to have a shot at winning an election.
Along with the emerging nightmares of Internet Voting and Vote-by-
Mail, IRV is yet another one of the horrible wack-a-mole schemes being
endlessly advanced by advocates and profiteers who put winning
elections and making money off them, over the idea of transparent,
verifiable, secure democracy and self-governance expressed of the
people, by the people and for the people....
...more at the link http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7198
KATHY DOPP "Realities Mar Instant Runoff - 18 Flaws and 3 Benefits
This report discusses flaws and benefits of instant runoff voting
(IRV) methods and shows how IRV
threatens the fairness, accuracy, timeliness, and economy of U.S.
elections.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf
FairVote's claims about IRV have gone unchallenged because so far IRV
has had minimal usage. I set up a website and blog just to help
educate the public about it. www.instantrunoffvoting.us I link to
news articles, studies and reports of actual usage of IRV, not talking
points.
IRV ADVOCATES DID TRY TO PUSH SAN FRANCISCO INTO TOUCHSCREENS FOR IRV
(but that's nothing compared to the complexity of the IRV tallying
algorithm used by both touchscreen and optical scan)
2003. The Los Angeles Voter Empowerment Circle recommended touch
screen voting machines for IRV to the state of California in 2003:
"touch screen machines for DRE systems are also better able to
ccommodate alternative voting methods such as Instant Runoff Voting.
We therefore believe that DRE systems are preferable to paper-based
systems, such as punch cards or optical scans.
http://www.instantrunoffvoting.us/votingsystems.html
IRV ADVOCATE ATTACKS CA SOS BOWEN (2007) Take a look at how Stephen
Hill, formerly with Fair Vote attacks California SOS Debra Bowen - in
a prominent California newspaper - for implementing security measures,
because they would slow down the IRV election in San Francisco:
S.F. supervisors blamed for blocking new voting system
John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, September 21, 2007
If it takes three weeks to count the votes in this November's
election, the Board of Supervisors should bear the blame, San
Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said Thursday...
… The tough restrictions put on the use of the company's voting system
in San Francisco are borderline ridiculous given how few people are
likely to run into the problems with the ink, said Steven Hill,
director of the political reform program of the New America
Foundation.
"We're talking about people who drop the pen they're given in the
voting booth, don't pick up the pen and then grab another pen without
black ink," he said. "That's a pretty small group."
Bowen "is basically throwing the book at ES&S, but it's the city
that's bearing the brunt of it," Hill said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/21/MN8ASA8T4.DTL
FAIRVOTE PARTNERS WITH VOTING VENDORS
Everyone Counts (E1C) has developed a very sophisticated online
election and survey product that handles multiple versions of ranked
ballot elections. E1C has allowed CVD to set up demonstration
elections with their system, and FairVote has partnered with E1C to
run private sector elections
http://fairvote.org/?page=1586
FAIRVOTE IS AN ELECTION VENDOR:
*and before FairVote scrubs this, note I've already made a screen
shot*
The Election Services Group
We perform your elections.
Since 1992, FairVote has been dedicated to fair elections where every
vote counts and
all voters are represented. As a catalyst for reform, we conduct
research, analysis, education and
advocacy to build understanding of and support for more democratic
voting systems.
Through our IRV America Program, we advocate instant runoff voting
(IRV) as an alternative to
plurality elections and traditional runoff elections. Our Election
Services Group (ESG) also consults
on electoral systems and implementation, with a focus on non-
governmental elections.
We provide full service consulting on all aspects of elections.
We have worked with organizations that include large companies,
small non-profit organizations and political parties. We are experts
in all aspects of elections,
including voting equipment, hardware, software, and procedures.
We can help you figure out the election solution that is right for
you.
Products
Simple Online, Electronic or by Mail IRV Vote: FairVote's Election
Services Group has
highlighted three options for implementing this method of IRV, as well
as the services and assistance
that we are able to provide.
Full Service Corporate Elections
General consulting on electoral design: Our consultants will work with
you to clarify the goals
of your election, select an appropriate electoral system.
Elections training: Our consultants will work with you to choose
balloting technologies that are right for you
and design any necessary voter education materials.
Referrals to technology providers: We are knowledgeable about election
technologies,
including mail voting, phone voting, Internet voting and hybrid
systems, and we can provide referrals
and recommendations about vendors.
Total solutions: We can assemble the necessary team to conduct all
aspects of an election at any scale.
Once you settle on the necessary parameters -- election design, voter
list, balloting technology and budget --
we will conduct the entire election from start to finish, from voter
education to certified election results.
Clients
ESG has had a wide clientele, including corporations, political
parties, and NGOs.
Our staff members have played key roles in providing technical
assistance with IRV
implementation in San Francisco, CA; Ferndale, MI; Burlington, VT;
Berkeley, CA and many other jurisdictions.
Sample
Download a sample voting system education presentation we created for
a client
For a list of clients or to discuss a project, please contact Program
Director David Moon at 301-270-4616
or dmoon(at)fairvote.org.
http://www.fairvote.org/?page=38
While FairVote may be pleased if 20-30% don't understand IRV, the city
council was NOT pleased.
While FairVote may be glad that a "majority polled" liked IRV, this is
no better than the argument that big insurance companies use that a
"majority polled" like their health insurance.
IF THE MAJORITY LIKES POLL TAXES, LITERACY TESTS, 3/5 VOTERS, DOES
THAT MAKE THEM A GOOD THING?
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 07:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
> To: Election...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [ei] Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and
> isstill glad
>
> Sunday, October 11, 2009
> Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and is still
> glad
>
> Rob Richie is doing his hard sell of Instant Runoff Voting again,
> claiming that poor, poor Cary North Carolina will have to suffer a one-
> to-one traditional runoff election. (All because they rejected IRV
> after using it once in 2007). How dare the little ole' city of Cary,
> North Carolina ignore the good advice of FairVote and Rob Richie,
> carpet-baggers er I mean uh academics who are smarter, better
> informed? Cary only has the most PHDs per capita for cities with
> population over 75,000. (http://www.comevisitcary.com/) What could
> To: Election...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [ei] Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and
> isstill glad
>
> Sunday, October 11, 2009
> Rebutting FairVote misinfo on Cary, NC - Cary ditched IRV and is still
> glad
>
> Rob Richie is doing his hard sell of Instant Runoff Voting again,
> claiming that poor, poor Cary North Carolina will have to suffer a one-
> to-one traditional runoff election. (All because they rejected IRV
> after using it once in 2007). How dare the little ole' city of Cary,
> North Carolina ignore the good advice of FairVote and Rob Richie,
> carpet-baggers er I mean uh academics who are smarter, better
> informed? Cary only has the most PHDs per capita for cities with
> they possibly know? Now Rob Richie is blaming the decision on
> politics, calling Cary, NC, a "Republican-leaning city." But FairVote
> loved Cary so much until this year. Using FairVote logic, can we
> assume that using IRV turned Cary into a "Republican-leaning city"?
> May I inject an "LOL" here?
>
> What Rob Richie doesn't tell you is that no one in Cary is
> complaining, and voters are looking forward to the face off. The field
> has been narrowed from 4 candidates to 2. The only trauma is for Rob
> Richie, who uses any adoption of IRV as a "victory" to use to persuade
> other places to adopt it. He's seeing defeat as places continue to
> ditch IRV or are considering ditching it.http://instantrunoff.blogspot.com/2009/06/places-that-have-ditched-in...
> politics, calling Cary, NC, a "Republican-leaning city." But FairVote
> loved Cary so much until this year. Using FairVote logic, can we
> assume that using IRV turned Cary into a "Republican-leaning city"?
> May I inject an "LOL" here?
>
> What Rob Richie doesn't tell you is that no one in Cary is
> complaining, and voters are looking forward to the face off. The field
> has been narrowed from 4 candidates to 2. The only trauma is for Rob
> Richie, who uses any adoption of IRV as a "victory" to use to persuade
> other places to adopt it. He's seeing defeat as places continue to
> unoff.html
>
> Anyway, this blog is correct the claim that "Runoff misery" is
> building support for Instant Runoff Voting in Cary North Carolina. We
> will also clarify some other issues. Here's Rob Richie's headline
> which has already caused some people to email me and ask "what
> universe is RR living in?".
>
> Runoff misery from New York City to Cary (NC) builds support for
> instant runoff voting October 10th, 2009. Rob Richie ...Cary’s city
> council voted to try IRV in 2007, and its voters overwhelmingly
> supported it.http://www.fairvote.org/blog/2009/10/runoff-mysery-from-new-york-city...
>
> Anyway, this blog is correct the claim that "Runoff misery" is
> building support for Instant Runoff Voting in Cary North Carolina. We
> will also clarify some other issues. Here's Rob Richie's headline
> which has already caused some people to email me and ask "what
> universe is RR living in?".
>
> Runoff misery from New York City to Cary (NC) builds support for
> instant runoff voting October 10th, 2009. Rob Richie ...Cary’s city
> council voted to try IRV in 2007, and its voters overwhelmingly
> y-nc-build-support-for-instant-runoff-voting/
>
> There's no misery in North Carolina. The misery is all Rob Richies.
> What really happened in 2007 and what have we learned since then? In
> 2007, the Wake County NC Board of Elections voted to volunteer for the
> IRV pilot. The City Council made a quick decision to give it a try.
> Cary voters were not involved in the decision and there was definite
> controversy after the decision was made. Two years later, Cary
> considered the matter again, and held several public meetings. see
> Cary NC tries IRV, then says ‘no more’
> (http://votingmatters.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/cary-nc-tries-irv-then-...
>
> There's no misery in North Carolina. The misery is all Rob Richies.
> What really happened in 2007 and what have we learned since then? In
> 2007, the Wake County NC Board of Elections voted to volunteer for the
> IRV pilot. The City Council made a quick decision to give it a try.
> Cary voters were not involved in the decision and there was definite
> controversy after the decision was made. Two years later, Cary
> considered the matter again, and held several public meetings. see
> Cary NC tries IRV, then says ‘no more’
> -more/)
>
> At Cary NC's City Council meeting on April 30, 2009, Cary City Council
> member Don Frantz reflected on the problem with the 2007 decision. He
> said:
>
> "When our town agreed to IRV in 2007, it was kind of rush job..There
> was a lot of pushback, the public wasn’t involved …"http://irvbad4nc.blogspot.com/2009/05/instant-runoff-voting-retreats-...
>
> At Cary NC's City Council meeting on April 30, 2009, Cary City Council
> member Don Frantz reflected on the problem with the 2007 decision. He
> said:
>
> "When our town agreed to IRV in 2007, it was kind of rush job..There
> h.html
>
> Rob Richie continues:
>
> More than 70% of voters preferred IRV to their former runoff system in
> a North Carolina State exit poll, and a full poll conducted by Cary in
> 2008 affirmed an overwhelming preference for using IRV again rather
> than keeping the traditional runoff system — indeed, on a scale of to
> 9, with 1 being most opposed to 9 being most in favor, 67.1%indicated
> a 7 or higher (including 51% indicating the highest level of 9) while
> only 6.9% indicated 3 or less.
>
> But liking does not = understanding. And a significant number of Cary
> voters did not understand instant runoff voting. When 22% just don't
> understand IRV at all, then it is just another glorified butterfly
> ballot, or a literacy test, 21st century style. Rob Richie also
> doesn't tell you how a FairVote employee admitted slanting the exit
> polling in Cary - see Slanting the exit poll of Cary's instant runoff
> voting election (IRV America Director quoted)http://instantrunoff.blogspot.com/2009/08/slanting-exit-poll-of-carys...
>
> Rob Richie continues:
>
> More than 70% of voters preferred IRV to their former runoff system in
> a North Carolina State exit poll, and a full poll conducted by Cary in
> 2008 affirmed an overwhelming preference for using IRV again rather
> than keeping the traditional runoff system — indeed, on a scale of to
> 9, with 1 being most opposed to 9 being most in favor, 67.1%indicated
> a 7 or higher (including 51% indicating the highest level of 9) while
> only 6.9% indicated 3 or less.
>
> But liking does not = understanding. And a significant number of Cary
> voters did not understand instant runoff voting. When 22% just don't
> understand IRV at all, then it is just another glorified butterfly
> ballot, or a literacy test, 21st century style. Rob Richie also
> doesn't tell you how a FairVote employee admitted slanting the exit
> polling in Cary - see Slanting the exit poll of Cary's instant runoff
> t.html
>
> Cary's Bi-Annual Survey says: 22% polled did not understand IRV at
> all.
>
> See Instant Runoff Voting Not So Good Polls: Cary NC, Hendersonville
> NC, Pierce Co WA, and San Francisco
> (http://irvbad4nc.blogspot.com/2009/10/instant-runoff-voting-not-so-go...
>
> Cary's Bi-Annual Survey says: 22% polled did not understand IRV at
> all.
>
> See Instant Runoff Voting Not So Good Polls: Cary NC, Hendersonville
> NC, Pierce Co WA, and San Francisco
> We will see how glad Cary is and what kind of turnout is earned in their
> runoff soon enough.
>
> Joyce, I am aware of the "fair and balanced" approach you take to your
> coverage of instant runoff voting in your Voting News (remind me if you
> linked to the endorsements in the past 8 days for local instant runoff
> voting ballot measures in the Seattle Times, Tacoma News Tribune and
> Minneapolis Star Tribune), but the 2008 poll in Cary is overwhelmingly
> strong evidence that people in Cary preferred IRV after its first elections
> with it to traditional runoffs. An absolute majority rated it 9 on a scale
> of 1 to 9, and those polled were ten times more likely to give it a 7 to 9
> than a 1 to 3. (The latter was about 7%)./mail2web
> runoff soon enough.
>
> Joyce, I am aware of the "fair and balanced" approach you take to your
> coverage of instant runoff voting in your Voting News (remind me if you
> linked to the endorsements in the past 8 days for local instant runoff
> voting ballot measures in the Seattle Times, Tacoma News Tribune and
> Minneapolis Star Tribune), but the 2008 poll in Cary is overwhelmingly
> strong evidence that people in Cary preferred IRV after its first elections
> with it to traditional runoffs. An absolute majority rated it 9 on a scale
> of 1 to 9, and those polled were ten times more likely to give it a 7 to 9
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages