Left In Lowell

Choice Voting Analysis

19 Responses to “Choice Voting Analysis”

1. Martha Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 10:36 am

   Great night!! I wonder if Lowell had “Choice” as a voting system, would Allan and Regina still hold their seats? An untested voting system could have unintended results. Trust the people –

2. Robby Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 10:54 am

   I voted in support of all three newcomers to the council yesterday. I also voted in support of our new school committee member. However, I did vote no one the question. The election results this year show that choice voting is unnecessary. We dont need to change the system to make changes on our council.

   Think about it for a second. If we had choice voting in place, Alan Kazanjian probably would have won reelection. The GOB’s would have voted Kaz #1, probably Bud and Rita #2 and #3, respectfully. Elliot most likely would have been disposed of. Ill take Elliot over Kaz any day.

   We dont need choice voting to do what we the People can, should, and actually did last night.

3. Lynne Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 11:11 am

   Robby: but look at the makeup of the committee. Once again, (other than Mendonca, who doesn’t identify much with his roots as I understand it), the Council is not representative of any minority voice. That is the sort of thing we need to change the voting system to accomplish - whether it’s Choice or some other form of course is open to debate.

   Martha: the thing is, though, is let’s say you have five GOB candidates. Let’s say there’s a core of 5,000 voters for those candidates (as in, about the average # of votes for the GOBs this time around) . Not all five will be able to divide that vote to get in. Two, maybe 3 will get in, but not all. In other words, you can’t build a tyranny of the majority using Choice voting.

   I agree the outcome yesterday was what we hoped for but honestly, this sort of “change” election with so much anger in the electorate regarding Sheehan, etc, is really really rare. It took a guy being investigated by the FBI, and another candidate who threatened a superintendent under criminal charge, for this incredible shift to happen. Do we really want to wait for the next criminal on the Council to get the next change?

4. Felicia Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 11:19 am

   Just a couple of comments about not needing choice voting. It took nearly 15 years, some pretty public poor behavior on elect officials part, and demographic shifts to make this kind of change happen. In 1993, City Council and School Committee meetings had started being covered on local cable and now we have another media change in the new media environment. I wouldn’t make the assumption that this sort of change can systemically happen with our current voting system. I’d say, Choice Voting would made the systemic change possible to keep this energy going.

   As to starting the campaign late, the campaign was working for over a year. However, the first communities targeted were those communities with the least amount of power and understanding of local politics. That work was grassroots and in traditionally ignored segments of the population. Agreed that the larger public campaign did happen in the last few months before the election.

5. JC Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 11:19 am

   I disagree that this year’s results “show that choice voting is unnecessary.” You are arguing under the assumption that all of the GOB’s would rank candidates Kaz, Bud, and Rita. That makes no sense, considering that Rita and Bud took in nearly double the total number of votes that Kaz did. Of Kazanjian’s 3,500 votes, how many of those would have been first choice votes? We can speculate, but we’ll never know. However, it is careless and unfair to just assume that a choice voting system would lead to the doomsday scenario of the incumbents retaining their seats.

6. Robby Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 11:22 am

   The problem is getting minorities out to the polls. 26% turnout actually considered good in my mind is pathetic. Voting for someone simply for being a minority is wrong. Just like voting for someone simply for being white would be wrong. I voted for the candidates that I believed would best represent my views and who would do the best job moving the city forward.

   Everyone on the council is different and unique in thier own individual way. You dont need a different skin color to be different. I really dont see what the big deal is in regards to minorities. If there were any legitimate minorities that ran that I agreed with, they would get my vote.

   Last year, Obama was the first legitimate black candidate for President, and he won easily.

7. Lynne Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 11:30 am

   Yes but it is discouraging to both the electorate that never sees representation, and the candidates who never make it to getting elected, due to the inequities in a all-open-seat system like Lowell’s, which is largely been discontinued elsewhere for good reason.

8. jmm Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 1:24 pm

   I agree with you Lynne about the need to get more people involved in the city election. It’s tough for me to say this because I can stand them, but maybe we should follow what ACORN did in the presidential election to a small extent. And by that I mean holding registration parties in historically low turnout areas. Also, if it’s change people want then term limits could be an answer too. There’s still plenty of GOB’s on this council that seem to be entrenched. I know atleast two of the newbie’s talked about supporting term limits while campaigning. It will be interesting to see whether they try and get something passed while on the council. Although I wouldn’t expect it right away just because there are many budget issues and whatnot that need to get dealt with.

9. Eleanor Rigby Says:
   November 4th, 2009 at 1:24 pm

   I think the 7 percent margin on a question that rightly or wrongly was confusing to people means that people are looking for a change, just not that change. I put myself into that category as anyone who reads this blog is already aware.

   Because of the hurdle of getting 33% voter turnout to even have a win count the people organizing this or other efforts need to approach the city council about the establishment of a charter commission to look at various alternatives to the present form of government. That would include public meetings in the neighborhoods etc that carry the weight of local government.

   I put a lot of blame, actually all of it, on the lack of local media coverage of the issues. Sure they covered the ballot question to a point but there were a lot of hot button issues in this campaign season and none were touched on by media.

   No media coverage, no interest or knowledge of the races. It’s really that simple!

10. Maggie Says:
    November 4th, 2009 at 3:01 pm

    Jmm needs a gentle reminder that ACORN is under investigation at least 14 states for voter fraud, much of which came from those voter parties. There has got to be a better way ( perhaps a van from the Election Com going from area to area on a Saturday) Term limits is another answer. I voted no on answer one , because no matter how hard I try, I cannot get my head around moving votes from one person to another.

11. Greg Page Says:
    November 4th, 2009 at 3:46 pm

    We have an opportunity next November to elect the first Cambodian-American to Congress in U.S. history. The Sam Meas candidacy could spark a lot of interest in politics within historically underrepresented groups…hopefully the people who advocate for greater ethnic representation don’t reject him outright because he’s from the GOP.. It will be interesting to see how things unfold, but to me the first key step is that he’s stepping forward and running. And whether you like PR or not, I agree with anyone who points out that “Fair” is a loaded word (as Kad Barma did today on Choosing a Soundtrack).

    [Full Disclosure: I am a Meas campaign volunteer. I won’t go around spamming the local blogs but will mention his name when it’s appropriate].

12. Lynne Says:
    November 4th, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    ER: You have to also remember, not everyone is reading the local media at all. So I wonder how far that will get turnout up in the end, even with perfect, every day, unbiased coverage.

    Please, Maggie, the ACORN crap is a red herring. Not to mention voter registration problems does NOT equal actual voter fraud. Mickey Mouse doesn’t vote.

    Greg: I have to reject him as being GOP, they’d kick me out of the party if I worked for him , but I love a competitive race regardless…should be interesting. I do think that elected officials should regularly have to come back and ask for your vote.

13. Lynne Says:
    November 4th, 2009 at 4:09 pm

    Oh, and ER - point taken on the charter commission! That’s likely to be the easiest route, if you could convince the majority of the Council that it’s in their best interest to represent the voters. It IS to some extent asking them to commit political seppuku, should there end up being more than one councilor in a single district (if that’s what the commission ended up with as a solution).

14. Eleanor Rigby Says:
    November 4th, 2009 at 10:17 pm

    Lynne you are correct on both points, lack of readership of the Sun is an issue, of course they could turn that around, at least temporarily leading up to a local election, by providing real coverage of the election. No one else has the ability to do that however the Sun chose not to do that. BTW why is it that media that professes to be in the advertising business are the worst industry in marketing itself? Most people watch TV…where are the Sun and WCAP’s TV ads?

    No one said changing a charter is easy and yes you will have convince the CCs that a Charter Commission is needed and in their interests. Usually CCs have a say in who sits on those commissions but at least the ball gets rolling without the 33% threashold.

15. jmm Says:
    November 4th, 2009 at 11:24 pm

    Maggie I despise ACORN. I do not need a gentle reminder. I thought I showed that in how I presented my point. Which was that we need to get the word out to the people who are registered voters that do not go to the polls come election time. We also need to people who are not registered to vote at all registered, LEGALLY. Whether thats passing out fliers or throwing neighborhood based parties to explain to people what democracy is all about. I myself voted no on the question because I do not believe choice voting is the answer. Getting more people to the polls is. And I think groups like ONE Lowell should focus more on spreading the word on the importance of voting to the ethnic minorities that seem not to vote. There was an article in the SUN within the last week that quoted a young Asian women as saying many of the older Asian voters do not vote because they fear some sort of retribution from local government like they did back in there home countries. I’m sorry that I had to use that group scumbags as an example.

16. Paul Says:
    November 5th, 2009 at 11:28 am

    Lynne,

    I very much want to thank you for your great work on this blog. I have been less active in most things Lowell in the last year due to changes in my personal life that takes me out of the city most week-ends and a huge work commitment. Your blog and other friends I trust really helped me make informed choices in my voting. As for Question 1 - 43% the first time around for a somewhat complicated proposal is very good. Change, as we know takes time and education is a big part of it. My congratulations on a great effort go out to CASA Lowell, Victoria Fahlberg, the progressive alternative media and Moving Lowell Forward. Great work one and all!!

17. rob Says:
    November 6th, 2009 at 11:02 am

    Hello, I’m not from Mass, but from California. I’ve been a longtime supporter of proportional representation. Congrats on getting 43% of the vote for what is in the US a revolutionary idea. To those who are satisfied with winner take all at large since their candidates did well under the current system, I view it kind of like instant replay rules in sports. I’d rather have a system that is inherently fair, instead of a hit or miss system. With PR your perspective will always have a chance of getting elected, with winner take all, its a feast or famine situation.

18. joe from Lowell Says:
    November 7th, 2009 at 6:00 pm

    I’ve seen a lot of people who are very open to election reform, but who had problems with choice voting in particular.

    Here’s my idea: everyone gets 9 votes, just as before, but they can divide them up however they want. 9 to one candidate, 1 each to nine candidates, or anywhere in between.

19. joe from Lowell Says:
    November 7th, 2009 at 6:04 pm

    “Please, Maggie, the ACORN crap is a red herring.”

    Indeed. Have we forgotten the US Attorney scandal and the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez already? Bogus voter fraud charges against ACORN - charges so bogus that even Republican political appointees refused to pursue the cases, and were thus fired on Karl Rove’s orders - were at the heart of that scandal.

Leave a Reply