Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Was Ranked Choice Voting a Success in Minneapolis?

Bookmark and Share

Less than half utilized 2nd choice option in mayoral race; voter turnout down by 25,000+ from 2005

Although nearly two-thirds of Minneapolis voters approved the change to ranked choice voting in 2006, less than half actually utilized the option of ranking multiple candidates in the mayoral election Tuesday night.

Back in 2006, 64.9 percent of Minneapolis voters checked 'yes' to approve ranked choice voting, while 35.1 percent disapproved. However, 18.8 percent of all those who voted in the '06 election did not vote on this ballot question; as such, 52.7 percent of all Minneapolis residents who went to the polls in 2006 actively voted to support the measure.

Ranked choice voting is heralded by its proponents, such as FairVote Minnesota, for a variety of reasons such as increasing voter participation, eliminating "wasted" votes by its ability to redistribute votes cast for less popular candidates to more popular candidates, solving the "spoiler" problem, and giving voters more choices.

But in the top-of-the-ticket mayoral race in 2009, in which incumbent R.T. Rybak won 73.6 percent of the vote as ranked choice voting made its debut in Minnesota, only a minority of Minneapolis voters utilized their new right to rank multiple candidates on the ballot.

Overall, 45,117 voted for a first choice in the mayoral race. But only 48.8 percent of Minneapolis voters (22,032) opted to vote for a second choice, and just 34.4 percent (15,511) ranked three candidates.

The question as to whether or not more Minneapolis residents would have taken advantage of the ranked choice voting system in the mayoral race if Rybak had faced greater competition remains an open one.

As for voter turnout, the ranked choice voting system did not seem to energize the electorate on its face. There were 25,156 fewer Minneapolis residents who turned out to vote at the ballot box in 2009 compared to the 2005 general election, or a drop of 35.8 percent. In 2005, 70,273 voted in the Minneapolis mayoral race, for a turnout of 30 percent, compared to 45,117 voters in 2009.

Low voter turnout generally can be partially attributed to the lack of competition in the 2009 mayoral race, although Rybak's 25-point victory over Peter McLaughlin in 2005 was hardly a nail-biter of a race.

The question for those concerned about civic engagement is whether or not voter turnout would have been even lower (or, theoretically, higher) if ranked choice voting had not been implemented in this year's election.

Ranked choice voting advocates did score a major victory Tuesday night, however, as the measure was passed by a narrow majority of 52 percent of voters in the City of St. Paul.

Two Minneapolis City Council races did not produce a majority winner in the first choice column Tuesday evening, and will therefore trigger the ranked choice voting redistribution of votes of the lowest ranked candidate(s) until one candidate reaches a majority.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Chris Coleman Posts Largest St. Paul Mayoral Victory in a Quarter Century
Next post: Upper Midwestern U.S. House Delegation Votes 13-10 in Favor of Health Care Bill

1 Comment


  • Does/will the Minnesota law actually require a majority to appoint an IRV winner, or, if enough ballots become exhausted (by not listing follow-up choices), does the win go to the highest plurality-scoring candidate from among the last two standing? (Or do exhausted ballots not count into the percentage?)

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    No Free Passes: States With 2 Major Party Candidates in Every US House Race

    Indiana has now placed candidates from both major parties on the ballot in a nation-best 189 consecutive U.S. House races, with New Hampshire, Minnesota, Idaho, and Montana also north of 100 in a row.

    Political Crumbs

    Gubernatorial Highs and Lows

    Two sitting governors currently hold the record for the highest gubernatorial vote ever received in their respective states by a non-incumbent: Republican Matt Mead of Wyoming (65.7 percent in 2010) and outgoing GOPer Dave Heineman of Nebraska (73.4 percent in 2006). Republican Gary Herbert of Utah had not previously won a gubernatorial contest when he notched a state record 64.1 percent for his first victory in 2010, but was an incumbent at the time after ascending to the position in 2009 after the early departure of Jon Huntsman. Meanwhile, two sitting governors hold the record in their states for the lowest mark ever recorded by a winning gubernatorial candidate (incumbent or otherwise): independent-turned-Democrat Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island (36.1 percent in 2010) and Democrat Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (47.8 percent in 2013).


    An Idaho Six Pack

    Two-term Idaho Republican Governor Butch Otter only polled at 39 percent in a recent PPP survey of the state's 2014 race - just four points ahead of Democratic businessman A.J. Balukoff. Otter's low numbers reflect his own struggles as a candidate (witness his weak primary win against State Senator Russ Fulcher) combined with the opportunity for disgruntled Idahoans to cast their votes for one of four third party and independent candidates, who collectively received the support of 12 percent of likely voters: Libertarian John Bujak, the Constitution Party's Steve Pankey, and independents Jill Humble and Pro-Life (aka Marvin Richardson). The six candidate options in a gubernatorial race sets an all-time record in the Gem State across the 46 elections conducted since statehood. The previous high water mark of five candidates was reached in seven previous cycles: 1902, 1904, 1908, 1912, 1914, 1966, and 2010.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting