Minneapolis will use ranked-choice voting method

  • Article by: STEVE BRANDT , Star Tribune
  • Updated: June 12, 2009 - 12:25 AM

Supreme Court victory for ranked-choice voting in Minneapolis is likely to spark moves for similar measures in other Minnesota cities.

  • 59
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
llboomgaJun. 11, 0910:30 AM

MPLS voter approved anything in 2006? It's gonna be hilarious watching the aftermath of this, considering the number of folks who cant manage to mark one oval on a ballor correctly. Maybe this is really a "job saving" effort, ACORN is gonna be really busy next election in MPLS!!

stel0116Jun. 11, 0910:40 AM

It's called "Instant Runoff Voting" not "Instant Voting."

marathongirlJun. 11, 0910:48 AM

How does instant runoff voting infringe on an individual's right to vote? If anything it gives them more leverage doesn't it? But how is it only Minneapolis will be using it. I'd think for city elections fine, but statewide and national elections I don't see how only one city can use that method.

peterellJun. 11, 0911:01 AM

Congratulations on being the first to modernize your voting system. It will give people a real ability to vote their consciences without getting the lesser of two evils and it will avoid expensive run-oofs and horrible court battles. There may be minor bugs to begin with, but thanks for leading the nation and experimenting with an improvement in voting.

stribread250Jun. 11, 0911:28 AM

The city of Minneapolis is not out of the woods. The decision is glaringly silent on the constitutionality of the application of the multi-seat formula if the races go to a runoff. The justices were notably skeptical of the system at oral argument, both those that understood it and those that didn't. This lawsuit just wasn't the proper vehicle for abrogating the system. The court has therefore set the table for an as-applied challenge which will almost certainly follow, as soon as the city actually counts an election and apportions proportionate votes. This will permit the court to take a much closer and more scrupulous look at the facts in the context of an actual election, but it means that, inevitably, the results of Minneapolis's next municipal election will be clouded.
Citizens of Minneapolis have reason to be concerned for the implications a post-election lawsuit has for the continuity of government. I would be surprised if City Council is detered by the real prospect of post-election litigation.

progpitbullJun. 11, 0911:51 AM

Keep drinking the IRV koolaid! Cary NC got conned into doing a pilot for IRV in the 2007 General Election. After our county BOE wasn't able to follow the written procedures and screwed up a count of only a little more than 3000 ballots, they had to do a secret non-public count that discovered a calculator error and missed votes. Cary got smart and didn't even seriously consider IRV in 2009. Only one other NC community did that - and that was because they didn't need to use the IRV tabulating method to get a winner. You should really check out who has used IRV recently before you crow about how it's an improvement in voting. 2/3 of Pierce County WA voters want to dump it, because it didn't ensure the winner got a majority vote in one election. The same goes for Aspen CO and Burlington, VT. IRV is an overly complicated method of voting and vote counting that is more costly than traditional elections and rarely used runoffs if you are honest about keeping track of all the expenses. And your own election board figured out it's gonna take weeks or months just to count the votes with IRV. Then you might be looking at another recount ala the Franken-Coleman race.

gpnm1959Jun. 11, 0912:12 PM

Dear Minnesota Supreme Court. I believe it is our constitutional right to have 2 Senators representing our state. 1st it took our Minnesota Supreme Court a month to hear the case. 2nd. Its been 10 days and no decision. 3rd The election was in November. I thought that they were on vacation until they made this decision.

colonel715Jun. 11, 0912:13 PM

There's a difference between registration and voting. As if you didn't know, ACORN has been investigated for *** registration *** improprieties.

john1065Jun. 11, 0912:16 PM

IRV should provide a clear majority winner for elections. If we had IRV on the state level, the minority parties would get there chance but not siphon off votes from the majority parties. We currently have a governor and had a U.S. Senator that did not receive more than 50% of the votes cast in the election.

Average_JoeJun. 11, 0912:31 PM

This is the most unfair, most repressive, most disenfranchising scheme ever to be proposed by liberals. If I'm a Republican in Minneapolis they're expecting me to make a second choice on a ballot that's going to have only ONE guy I'd vote for. My 2nd choice is never going to be a DFL'er but that's almost always going to end up being what's available. So while DFL'ers will have multiple options on a ballot, Republicans will be disenfranchised. Not that that sort of thing matters much to liberals.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters