This commentary is by Dr. Betty Keller of St. Johnsbury, president of Vermont Physicians for a National Health Program and an independent voter. She joined the League of Women Voters to help make democracy work.
“What will just over $71,000 in television, newspaper and social media ads get you?”
VTDigger’s March 16 Final Reading article was correct that the ads for ranked choice voting placed by Vermont Public Interest Research Group did not lead to passage of a Senate bill, S.229, but the ads did bring a lot of attention to ranked choice voting, which was the point.
Last year, there were three bills in the House for ranked choice voting in Vermont, in addition to the one for Burlington’s charter change. The Legislature failed to take up Burlington’s charter change bill despite a fair amount of noise about it, and none of the other bills got any attention at all from legislators or the public in 2021.
This year is very different. The League of Women Voters of Vermont supports ranked choice voting and would have liked to see the legislature take up H.352, to allow any town in Vermont to choose ranked choice voting without requiring permission from the state Legislature. We are pleased that at least the Legislature may make it possible for Burlington to follow the will of its voters.
The ads are correct — ranked choice voting is as easy as 1-2-3 for voters. Secretary of State Jim Condos is also correct: Administering fair and safe elections, under any system, is complicated.
The League of Women Voters commends our Legislature and our Office of the Secretary of State on the many features of Vermont’s electoral system that have garnered us a No. 1 ranking for the 2020 election in the Elections Performance Index created by the Election Data and Science Lab at MIT.
We also commend the public: for pushing our Legislature to increase opportunities for voter registration and voting, and for exercising their right and responsibility to vote with the new feature of mail-in voting.
Town clerks and the Secretary of State’s office are working together to improve the implementation of this voting method that is new to many. Soon they will also be working together to train town staff to use new voting machines that, with the appropriate ballots and with training of staff, can perform ranked choice voting.
Ranked choice voting for local elections can be handled entirely within a town. If the election yields a majority right off, the election is finished. But if there is no majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is no longer in the running and ballots with that candidate marked as their first choice are transferred to the candidate who was listed as second choice. Whether this is done by hand in a small town, or by machine in a larger town, the election is managed within the town and a result is determined promptly.
When voters from more than one town are voting for a candidate, the results across the involved towns are all considered. If there is no majority overall, a secure, accountable process must be determined for the ranking process, using machines that we haven’t even used yet.
We will also need to carefully comb through our election laws to assess whether any other laws will need amending. Laws regarding process and time limits that were simple for plurality voting may not work for ranked choice voting. This shouldn’t be rushed to the potential detriment of the security of and confidence in our elections.
A concern the Secretary of State’s Office has had is regarding the confusion many voters have in primary elections, where they are handed three ballots and are allowed to fill out only one, but are required to return all three. In 2020, Alaska passed a ballot measure requiring a “jungle primary,” where all candidates for a single office, from any party, are all on the same ballot. Each voter marks only their favorite candidate in that primary election. Then the top four candidates are on the general election ballot, and voters rank them in that election.
For states like Vermont with more than two parties, having the top five candidates receiving the most votes go on to the general election would provide voters with more choice.
This method of voting would solve the problem of the multiple ballots in the primary election, as well as provide the benefits of ranked choice voting.
The League of Women Voters appreciates that many voters are now more familiar with the concept of ranked choice voting. We also appreciate the careful consideration of our end goal. If ultimately we were to want a system like Alaska’s, we should develop that plan thoughtfully and educate the public about the jungle primary as well as the ranked choice voting general election.
Another consideration is the current climate of reduced confidence in our elections in our country. The League of Women Voters supports ranked choice voting, but recognizes the importance of educating the public and those implementing it for a smooth transition and a secure election. Any foibles marring an election using ranked choice voting could be a big setback in voter confidence. We want to keep our No. 1 ranking throughout any changes we might make.
