Instant Runoff Voting Aids "Majority Rule"

"Majority rule" is one of the cornerstones of our representative democracy. Unless a candidate wins a majority of the vote, we cannot be certain that the winner is the one preferred by the most voters.

Yet, too often, American elections fail this most basic test of democracy.

In three of our last four presidential elections, the winning candidate did not have a majority of the national popular vote.

In the Inland Empire, candidates with less than a popular majority have won important races. In recent years, such winners have included the mayors of Barstow, Fontana and Rialto, a member of the Board of Supervisors in San Bernardino County, as well as winners of seats on various school boards, utility agencies and community service districts.

Fortunately, there are better methods that guarantee the election of winners with support from a majority of voters.

One option is to hold a second, runoff election between the top two finishers to determine the majority winner.

Some elections in the Inland Empire have employed that option, including races for five seats on the Riverside City Council, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, and San Bernardino County's auditor and district attorney. Runoff races, however, can be expensive. Riverside's City Council races required a second, stand-alone election in January, and taxpayers had to foot the bill.

Better than a two-round runoff election is a method known as instant runoff voting (IRV) because it elects majority winners in a single election, saving both time and taxes. Here's how it works:

Voters rank candidates in order of preference: a first ranking for your favorite candidate, a second ranking for your next-favorite, and so on. A candidate who wins a majority of first ranking wins the race. If not, the "instant runoff" begins.

The candidate with the least votes is eliminated. Ballots for the eliminated candidate are immediately canvassed for the voter's second-ranked candidate -- the one you'd support if forced to come back to the polls. Ballots are recounted and, if a candidate has a majority, he or she wins. If not, the process is repeated until one candidate has majority support.

In last November's election, San Francisco used IRV for the first time in local races. Two exit polls showed that voters liked the new system and found it easy to use. San Francisco's experience also shows that IRV offers something to those tired of polarized politics and mudslinging campaigns -- it discourages negative campaigning.

That's because winners may need to attract the second or third rankings from the supporters of rival candidates. The incentive is to find common ground and build coalitions with other candidates, rather than tearing one another down.

San Francisco saw a noticeable rise in positive campaigning and coalition-building in several races, prompting a New York Times article headlined: "New Runoff System in San Francisco Has the Rival Candidates Cooperating."

Using IRV, Inland Empire voters could guarantee majority winners in a single election, saving time and taxes. Instant runoff voting is a model of efficiency and cost savings, and that should be a welcome change, not only in the Inland Empire but everywhere.