Better off fighting for IRV

by Jack Santucci // Published August 3, 2006
via Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog

Pennsylvania Democrats apparently will challenge the ballot status of the Green Party's candidate for Senate, Carl Romanelli, partly because Republican operatives collected signatures to get him on the ballot.

It might not be news to readers of this blog, but IRV would reverse the dynamics of this entire broil. With instant runoff voting for statewide office, Democrats would want Romanelli on the ballot, as his core support probably would end up in their total votes column after an instant runoff. Republicans therefore would not be soliciting signatures to put him there.

Comments currently closed for Better off fighting for IRV

  • I read similar article also named Better off fighting for IRV, and it was completely different. Personally, I agree with you more, because this article makes a little bit more sense for me

    Posted by Daniel, 2008-05-23 11:07:15 (5 years ago)

  • Taking IRV on the road! Citizens For A Better Veterans Home is doing 2500 miles (4400 Kilometers) in a "Wild West Circle tour 2006" touting California Indie Govenator Wanna Bee and Lost Angeles County teacher Eric "Moose" Mahoney, Idoho Natural Law Party/ United Party founder and Idaho ballot access candidate Andy Hedden-Nicely and the failed veterans groups and government programs supposedly assisting former military and their families. We are also spending time touting IRV. Sandy Ego here we com.

    Posted by Citizens For A Better Veterans Home, 2006-08-09 11:15:01 (7 years ago)

  • A further irony of the Pennsylvania Green ballot access controversy is that the Greens polled enough votes in November 2004 to meet Pennsylvania's legal definition of "party". It's crazy that the law required them to get any signatures for their nominees anyway. That aspect of the Pennsylvania law is pending in the US Court of Appeals and a decision is due any day now.

    Posted by Richard Winger, 2006-08-03 11:25:39 (7 years ago)