[EL] RCV in San Francisco

Sat Jun 30 08:11:51 PDT 2018

Look forward to checking out that data on turnout disparities.

We found stark differences in California, say. (And its even bigger in a
cities with odd year elections that have a winnowing round before November
- Minneapolis was good example.(  For California this year see

http://www.politicaldata.com/absentee-vote-tracker/

Example of a stat: California registered voters under 35 received 24% of
mailed absentee ballots & registered voters over 64 received 26% of mailed
ballots. Very close to the same number. But those older voters on June 5th
represented half of all returned ballots & younger ones only 9% of returned
ballots.

On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Kogan, Vladimir <kogan.18 at osu.edu> wrote:

> Rob,
>
>
>
> I don’t want to drag out the conversation/debate, and I agree with much of
> what you wrote. I do want to make one point: We’ve found
> <http://glenn.osu.edu/educational-governance/research/research-attributes/KLP_Timing.pdf>
> (much to my surprise) that the difference in the composition of the
> electorate between primary elections and November even-year midterm
> elections is actually smaller than the differences in composition between
> presidential November elections and midterm November elections. (The
> difference between primaries and odd-year November elections is even
> smaller.) So if one is concerned about electorate composition and
> representativeness, I think the distinction between presidential November
> elections and all others is more important than between different type of
> lower-turnout elections.
>
>
>
> Vlad
>
>
>
> PS: My concern is that we might see more “Perot”-type candidacies under
> RCV than we do today, since the threat of potentially splitting the vote
> and producing the worst possible outcome, which kept Bloomberg from
> running, would be diminished.
>
>
>
> [image: The Ohio State University]
> *Vladimir Kogan*, Associate Professor
> *Department of Political Science*
>
> 2004 Derby Hall | 154 N. Oval Mall, Columbus, OH 43210
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=154+N.+Oval+Mall,+Columbus,+OH+43210&entry=gmail&source=g>
> -1373
> 510/415-4074 Mobile
>
> 614/292-9498 Office
>
> 614/292-1146 Fax
>
> http://u.osu.edu/kogan.18/
> kogan.18 at osu.edu
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Rob Richie [mailto:rr at fairvote.org]
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 30, 2018 10:24 AM
> *To:* Kogan, Vladimir
> *Cc:* Rick Hasen; Election Law Listserv
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] RCV in San Francisco
>
>
>
> I'm glad you do see RCV as a contextual improvement. Context always is
> important.
>
>
>
> My final points on this today will be:
>
>
>
> * The data doesn't suggest that RCV will results in candidates winning
> with fewer votes than plurality. Candidates of course do "forge on" within
> plurality toady. When Perot ran in 1992, only one of 50 states was one with
> a majority of the vote. RCV would clearly have been an improvement. And if
> the major parties are truly so unrepresentative and so much in need of
> "propping up" that we must maintain unfair voting rules, we have far deeper
> problems to consider.
>
>
>
> * Winnowing the field to two in low turnout, highly unrepresentative
> electorates to me is highly problematic. Several cities have gone to RCV
> exactly because the data from such primaries revealed the disturbingly
> small and unrepresentative nature of electorates that often determined
> outcomes. That's one of my biggest concerns with Top Two in California in
> contrast to ways that RCV could improve it:  the turnout in June is much
> less representative of the electorate than November especially among
> Hispanic voters and young voters. Yet those Top Two primaries in June
> effectively decide all but a handful of races, leaving the far more
> representative November electorates with pretty rubber stamps, but little
> meaningful role in defining their representation.
>
>
>
> * For those compelled to correct the "RCV is designed to uphold majority
> rule" argument, I just hope they also rigorously challenge claims about
> primary runoff elections, given their problems And I would say that what
> advocates often say isn't unreasonable in a world in which we accept
> imperfection: with RCV you can't win in the first round without a majority
> and you can't win in the last round without a majority over your top
> opponent, at least among those with a preference between those candidates
> -- and that far more voters on average will express that final round
> preference than come back for a runoff.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
>
>
>

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Richie
President and CEO, FairVote
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 240
Takoma Park, MD 20912
rr at fairvote.org  (301) 270-4616  http://www.fairvote.org
*FairVote Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/FairVoteReform>*   *FairVote
Twitter <https://twitter.com/fairvote>*   My Twitter
<https://twitter.com/rob_richie>

Thank you for considering a *donation
<http://www.fairvote.org/donate>. Enjoy our video on ranked choice voting
<https://youtu.be/CIz_nzP-W_c>!*
(Note: Our Combined Federal Campaign number is 10132.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180630/410d46a3/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3605 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180630/410d46a3/attachment.png>