One would think with 35 candidates in the race, it could get nasty, with many candidates going negative against the perceived front-runners. That never happened, and ranked-choice voting is widely credited with keeping the candidates focused on their vision for the city instead of knocking their opponents.READ MORE
To: Minneapolis Charter Commission
From: FairVote Minnesota
Date: July 2, 2014
Subject: Testimony Regarding Filing Fees for Public Office
It was probably inevitable that ranked-choice voting (RCV), long opposed by the states Republican Party, would also encounter DFL resistance.
Allowing voters to rank candidates in multicandidate contests is disruptive to the political establishment. It creates a disincentive for negative campaigning, altering long-established thinking about how to win elections. Because it eliminates primaries, it keeps non-establishment candidates in the running longer, giving them more opportunity to catch fire. Since the primaries it eliminates are often low-turnout affairs, it dilutes the power of parties and interest groups.
Dear friends of democracy,
Mayor Pete Lindstrom and Council Vice President Emily Larson: Local governments deserve the option of ranked-choice voting
This legislative session, we have missed a great opportunity for innovative, reform-minded Minnesota cities. Despite bipartisan support for ranked-choice voting, the Senate elections committee prevented a hearing of the local options bill. This bill would have given cities like ours the flexibility and the tools to switch to RCV.
The bill contained no mandates, and it would have had absolutely no impact on cities uninterested in exploring RCV. But for us and a number of interested cities across our state, it offered two important things: the freedom to give it a try without seeking legislative approval, along with guidelines and structure to ensure smooth, uniform implementation.READ MORE