A review of Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) RCV in Minnesota by Dave Durenberger former U.S. Senator from Minnesota from 1978 to 1995. Jane Prince a Member of the St. Paul City Council, and Adam Vetvick Attorney a Board Member for FairVote Minnesota, a Nonprofit that Advocates for RCV.
After reading your perplexing Post-Election Editorial, in the TwinCities Pioneer Press, about RCV in St. Paul (“Ranked-voting plays a victory march. We worry about ‘Minnesota Shush,’ ” Nov. 16), we have a deeper appreciation for the phrase “wrenching defeat from the jaws of victory.” Your tepid statement that while RCV “influenced the tenor of the campaign, Ranked Choice Voting didn’t ultimately get its first full citywide test in St. Paul” was beyond mind-boggling.
Not only was RCV put to the test, it passed with Flying Colors.
Voters came out in Stronger-than-Expected Numbers, with more than 3/4 Choosing to Rank their Ballots
Was RCV the determinative cause of Higher Turnout? We can’t say, but it’s impossible to ignore, as you seem to do in the Editorial, that the Dynamics of an RCV Campaign, more Robust and Diverse Slate of Candidates who crossed the Demographic and Political Spectrum, Dozens of Debates that Engaged Voters in the important Conversation about the Future of their City and the Lack of Spoiler and Vote-Splitting Dynamics, conspired to Engage more Voters on Election Day. If we choose to Evaluate based on Outcomes, the Answer is Clear.
Voters fiercely Rejected Old-School Attack Politics
In a Race that was considered too close to call between Melvin Carter and Pat Harris, Carter resoundingly carried the day in the very First Round of Counting. Did the New Civil approach to Campaigning required by RCV encourage Voters to opt for the Candidate perceived to be on the higher ground? We’ll never know for sure but, again, the Results point in that direction. While Pat Harris emphatically denounced the Unwarranted Attack, it was too late to Reverse the speed with which the Attack backfired under RCV. In 2015, we saw a similar Tactic Fail in St. Paul’s Ward 2 Election.
Voters Attended more than Two Dozen Mayoral Forums, received Literature and made ample use of Candidates’ Websites to Compare and Contrast their Positions
They knew precisely why they made their First Choice.
You attributed “the quiet during the many months of the campaign to the risk-averse appeal of the safer path,” and even added a clever slogan “Minnesota Shush” to make your point. Here’s a different Slogan for your consideration and this one actually reflects what happened during the Campaign and Election: “Minnesota Smart.”
That “quiet” that you found so befuddling was the sound of Smart Voters and Candidates talking in Civil and Respectful Voices about real Issues and possible Solutions to our Citywide Problems.
It’s time for the Pioneer Press Editorial Board, and all Minnesota Journalists engaged in Political Coverage and Commentary for that matter, to Evaluate a stuck-in-the-past mindset that craves Sensational Headlines and frothy stories of Campaign Attacks. Campaigns made of fierce Competition of Ideas and Choice fostered by RCV, not Two-Way Races fought in the boxing ring, are what our State, and Country, need more urgently than ever.
This Election has demonstrated the Merits of RCV and it’s time for Editors and Reporters to listen to your Readers, who like it and want to keep it. And, it’s time to adapt your News Coverage and Editorial Commentary to reflect this New, more Empowering way to Campaign, Vote, and Govern. There’s no way Voters are going back to the old days of Single-Digit Turnout Primaries Ruled by Special Interests.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
