Nice summary of Q 1, Dick. We are not giving up on getting ranked choice voting for all elections, including governor. For now, the legislature is insisting on a constitutional amendment to essentially replace plurality with majority as the deciding factor for state elections. I think constitutional amendments require 2/3 vote of the legislature, hence we’d all better work hard to elect more Dems who favor RCV much more strongly than Reps.
40 Washington St
Ellsworth, ME 04605
On Jun 5, 2018, at 9:12 AM, Dick Atlee <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
I’ve run into a number of people with misconceptions about what passing Question 1 — the Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) people’s veto — will actually accomplish. I checked with Ann Luther, one of the principal League of Women Voters people involved with the RCV effort, and she made it clear that
1. RCV will be available for all primaries.
2. RCV will be available for federal offices in general elections.
3. RCV will *NOT* be available for state offices in general elections,
unless/until a constitutional amendment is passed to eliminate the
requirement that state offices are elected by a plurality.
This last may come as a shock to some people who were under the impression that Question 1 would resolve our long-standing problem with gubernatorial 3-way elections. It won’t.
HCCN mailing list