ON NOV 3, 2009. PIERCE COUNTY WASHINGTON.Majority of Pierce County voters reject Instant Runoff Voting on Nov 3 Instant runoff voting was rejected by an overwhelming majority of Pierce County Washington Voters. 44,145 of 64,106 voters said yes to ditching instant runoff voting, also called ranked choice voting. That is 71.76% for eliminating IRV and 28.24% who wanted to keep IRV.
Pierce voters ditch instant runoff voting - save $500K for taxpayers immediately
Nov 10 2009... Voters' repeal of Ranked-Choice Voting last week also freed-up $500,000 would have been needed to implement the voting system for the 2010 election.
Also see Voters changing their minds on ranked-choice
Background: A poll from 2008 showed that 63% of Pierce County WA voters don't like Ranked Choice Voting. That is 56,751 out of 90,738 Pierce County voters who answered a questionnaire included with their ballots that asked, “Did you like this new Ranked Choice Voting method?” December 7, 2008 The News Tribute. The county could save $600,000 if they scrapped instant runoff voting now.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hmmmm, too bad that this isn't d that Pierce County WA. It's Burlington, VT, where IRV has already saved the City thousands of dollars in runoff election costs, period.
Uninformed reply. You have no idea what the software and management of IRV cost, the upgrades and maintenance -- you have no idea. Why don't you do some research and inform yourself? Then compare that expense to what a runoff costs, and look at whether the money is spent locally or sent to Maryland consultants. Why do you think that Maryland company was a heavy donor, both cash and in-kind, of the 2005 IRV campaign, and now is fighting the Repeal with large campaign donations. Follow the money and you will find a wicked web of conflicts of interest.
"You have no idea what the software and management of IRV cost"
They don't cost that much at all. Certainly no more than what was being spent before IRV.
"Why don't you do some research and inform yourself?"
Why don't YOU try & bring some real facts to the table??
"Then compare that expense to what a runoff costs"
...which IRV avoids completely.
"or sent to Maryland consultants."
Don't worry...it isn't, but you're trying to change the subhject away from IRV, again. It's not working...
"Follow the money and you will find a wicked web of conflicts of interest."
Lobbing incendiary charges like this with absolutely ZERO evidence is a shame IMHO.
Post a Comment