Dear Editor: Rank Choice Voting

Dear Editor,

Rank Choice Voting: Ballot issues CI126 and CI-127; most of this explanation of Rank Choice Voting came from Ballotpedia.

The way to think of it is election by elimination. Let's say six candidates are running for office. Under today's system, whoever gets the most votes wins. Done. Finished.

With Rank-Choice Voting, a candidate wins when they have 51% of the votes. (The legislature could require a supermajority of 61%, though I don't know why.)

In the first round, Candidate A received 31%, Candidate B received 28%, Candidate C received 15%, Candidate D received 13%, Candidate E received 10%, and Candidate F received 3%.

Since none of the candidates received 51%, the last candidate is eliminated, and voting goes on again for a second round. In the second round, there are five candidates. If the top vote-getter has less than 51%, the last-place candidate is eliminated again. The election is rerun for another go-around.

Conceivably, this could go for five rounds. Why? There is an added expense of printing, labor, and voter time. How many of you want to make more than one trip to vote? And to be honest, there is already a lack of interest for many to go to the polls.

Rank-choice voting has a history. It's not a new concept. A 2016 American Politics Research article by Jack Santucci showed that of the 24 cities that tried rank-choice voting, 23 have repealed it. Cambridge, Massachusetts, uses a multi-winner form to elect its nine-member city council and six-member school board.

Three states use RCV statewide: Alaska and Maine use Rank-Choice Voting in federal and statewide elections, and Hawaii uses It in certain statewide elections. Utah is trying a pilot program in twelve localities. It is a test vote set to expire after the next election (2025).

So far, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, South Dakota, and Tennessee have passed laws to stop Rank Choice Voting.

The issue is that special interest is trying to make it part of the Montana Constitution.

That is the only way they can get around the Rank Choice Voting Law.

This is an easy one to look into. I will be voting no CI-126 and CI-127. How about you?

JIM BUTERBAUGH

Whitehall, Montana