Expensive runoffs with dismal turnout: What's the solution? | The Election Page | Indy Week
Pin It

Expensive runoffs with dismal turnout: What's the solution? 

When Mary Fant Donnan won the Democratic nomination for labor commissioner in a statewide runoff last week, the cost to taxpayers was about $4 million. Given the tiny turnout, it amounted to about $50 a vote.

The reason for the high price tag: In most counties—Wake County, for example—there were no local primaries requiring runoffs, so the labor commissioner contest was the only race on the ballot. (Runoffs occur when no candidate receives at least 40 percent of the vote in the first round.)

Nonetheless, if even one statewide primary needs a runoff, all of the state's 3,000 polling places in each of the 100 counties must be opened and staffed just as in the first primary round.

And as Bob Hall, executive director of Democracy North Carolina, points out, it's not the state that pays to open them, it's the counties. So while the average cost per vote statewide last week was roughly $50 ($4 million divided by a total of about 75,000 votes cast for labor commissioner and a handful of local runoffs), in most counties where there were no local contests the cost per vote typically exceeded $70.

What's the alternative?

Democracy NC, a progressive reform group, supports "instant runoff voting," or IRV, as the antidote to expensive runoffs. With IRV, voters cast their ballots as usual in the first primary, but they can also mark a second choice (and a third and a fourth, etc.).

When the ballots are counted, if no candidate hits the 40 percent mark, all but the top two vote-getters are eliminated and the ballots are recounted. In the recount, though, if a voter's first-choice candidate didn't make it into the top two but her second-choice candidate did, that second-choice vote is added to the candidate's total "instantly." No need for an actual runoff weeks later and at great expense.

IRV has its opponents. Most prominent among them is Joyce McCloy, the Winston-Salem activist who founded the N.C. Coalition for Verified Voting. After the 2004 elections, the coalition lobbied successfully for a state law requiring that all touch-screen voting machines create a "verifiable" paper trail. Otherwise, its members said, someone could hack the touch-screen software and steal votes—and no one would know it.

McCloy, in e-mails circulated this week, warned that IRV might not be cheaper than holding actual runoffs, given the cost of developing tamper-proof IRV software (and training election officials on IRV practices).

Her solution: Don't have any runoffs. By her count, 42 states don't. Or else, lower the threshold below 40 percent to make runoffs less frequent. Or stop electing such offices as labor commissioner and superintendent of public instruction, where recent runoff primaries have produced dismal turnouts, and make them gubernatorial appointees instead.

To that extent, she and Hall might agree.

"There's got to be a better way than these embarrassing statewide runoff elections," Hall says, "either by filling some of the Council of State positions by gubernatorial appointment, nominating others with a different threshold for victory, using IRV, or something."

A legislative committee in the House was expected to discuss the IRV issue today in connection with an omnibus elections-law funding bill. Last year, Cary and Hendersonville conducted local elections using the IRV method under a pilot-program law that will expire this year unless the General Assembly extends it.

  • The runoff election cost taxpayers about $4 million. Given the tiny turnout, it amounted to about $50 a vote.

Comments (5)

Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in The Election Page



Twitter Activity

Most Recent Comments

You can thank yourselves, INDY, for endorsing Clinton.

Absolute cowards!

Democrats have been afraid to own their …

by BEES on We Broke the Machine: The 2016 Election and the Flailing American Experiment (The Election Page)

Indy Week - do you still feel as smug now about your Hillary endorsement? I blame you and the legions …

by Whatswrongwithyou on We Broke the Machine: The 2016 Election and the Flailing American Experiment (The Election Page)

Respectfully, I don't see what the point of this article is. It neatly summarizes this year while putting five dollar …

by gwalters on We Broke the Machine: The 2016 Election and the Flailing American Experiment (The Election Page)

A reasonable person would find much to agree in what you wrote but one passage stood out for me

by Mike Moore on We Broke the Machine: The 2016 Election and the Flailing American Experiment (The Election Page)

Comments

You can thank yourselves, INDY, for endorsing Clinton.

Absolute cowards!

Democrats have been afraid to own their …

by BEES on We Broke the Machine: The 2016 Election and the Flailing American Experiment (The Election Page)

Indy Week - do you still feel as smug now about your Hillary endorsement? I blame you and the legions …

by Whatswrongwithyou on We Broke the Machine: The 2016 Election and the Flailing American Experiment (The Election Page)

Most Read

No recently-read stories.

Visit the archives…

© 2016 Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation