 |
|||||
|
No wasted votes
by John A. Jackson
A reader in Palos Verdes Estates is certain I'm going to vote for George Bore, or maybe Al Gush. One of them, anyhow. She writes:
"I do not think you are the kind of person who will not vote or vote for a party who has not one chance to win, because to me it is the same as not voting. I feel we should choose the less evil of the two major parties."
The lesser of two weevils, Patrick O'Brian called it. Like eating bugs. As it happens, the lady is probably wrong. But I understand her point, and it's a good one.
The only wasted vote, in my book, is one you cast for someone you don't believe in. But your vote can certainly have an effect opposite to the one you want.
Let's say for example that there are three candidates for an office. Call them Bush, Gore and Nader. Let's say I absolutely can't stand Gore, don't much like Bush and know Nader can't win.
But my vote for Nader, instead of Bush, just might put Gore over the top -- the outcome I'd like least. So I disregard Nader and vote for Bush -- by my standards throwing my vote away.
This is not an idle worry. Polls show that fear of wasting their votes stopped a lot of people from voting for Ross Perot in 1992 and may just have kept Perot out of the White House.
Moreover, in a close election, votes cast for a third party candidate can prevent any candidate from achieving a majority. That happened to Bill Clinton in both 1992 and 1996. Did that hurt his presidency? It may well have.
Another and worse effect is that lacking any outside challenge, the two major parties try to become more and more alike and to slight their core constituencies, which have nowhere else to go.
There's no solution to this problem under this country's present system of voting. But there is a solution -- and it's not crazy either, or even hard to use or explain.
It's used right now in such exotic places as Britain, Australia and Ireland. The reform is called Instant Runoff Voting (IRV).
Let's stick with our three imaginary candidates, although IRV can be used for any number. When you vote, you simply indicate your first and second choices: Nader and Bush, in the example used above.
If Nader finishes third, your first -- choice vote would not be counted, but your second-choice vote would be applied. You would still be voting against Gore, which you want, and not for him.
With more than three candidates, IRV continues the process of discarding one set of votes and recalculating until one candidate wins a majority. Minority victors do not occur, nor is a vote for a minor candidate ever wasted.
IRV proposals are gaining ground now in several states, including Alaska, Vermont and New Mexico, and in a number of cities. Even better, according to proponents, IRV can be implemented in any election without changing federal law or the Constitution.
It ought to be done. But will it?
I am indebted to the October 16 issue of the Nation magazine for the background information on instant runoff voting. The article is entitled "If Politics Got Real..."
John Jackson may be reached at TomShadwell@cs.com.