Writing the Rules to Rank the Candidates: Examining the Impact of Instant-Runoff Voting on Racial Group Turnout in San Francisco Mayoral Elections

Abstract

Instant-runoff voting (IRV)-a relatively new electoral reform adopted in several cities in the United States-gives voters the option to rank-order more than one candidate preference for each office. When no candidate initially obtains a majority of first choice votes, rank-ordered preferences are used to "instantly" calculate a winner without requiring a separate runoff election. The impact of IRV on racial group voter turnout in urban elections has not previously been subject to rigorous analysis. Based on racial group interest theory, I argue that the complexity of IRV increases information costs and obscures racial group interests for voters. Analysis of precinct-level racial group voter turnout rates in five San Francisco mayoral elections from 1995 to 2011 reveals a significant relationship between IRV and decreased turnout among Black and White voters. IRV exacerbates turnout disparities related to age and education in the population, but decreases the effect of income. The relationship between turnout and racial diversity is diminished among some groups.Understanding how electoral rules and institutions impact voter turnout in urban elections is one of the most important questions for those who are interested in the quality of democracy in cities. The history of urban reform is replete with political factions who attempt to alter the rules governing voting and elections as a way to advance the interests and goals of their political coalition and allied groups (Bridges & Kronick, 1999;Trounstine, 2008). Writing and rewriting the rules governing how and when people vote in urban and local elections has a tremendous impact on who turns out to vote in, and, ultimately, has an influence on who wins those elections (Hajnal & Trounstine, 2005.One legacy of the urban reform movement in the United States is the prevalence of nonpartisan mayoral elections, which require a separate runoff election if no candidate initially receives a majority of the votes cast. Several cities in the United States have recently adopted a particular set of electoral rules that eliminate the need for a separate runoff election. These electoral rules, known in the United States as instant-runoff voting (IRV) or ranked-choice voting (RCV), are a variation on alternative vote (AV) procedures used in several jurisdictions around the world. IRV/RCV balloting systems provide voters the option of rank-ordering a number of preferred candidates from the list of candidates for each elected office. In some jurisdictions voters are allowed to rank-order as many candidates as are listed. As adopted in San Francisco, voters are only given the option to rank-order as many as three preferred candidates, and recording fewer than three candidate preferences will not invalidate a voter's ballot. In an IRV/RCV election, if no candidate receives a majority of first place votes in the initial tally, the candidate with the fewest first place votes is eliminated. Second and third place votes are reallocated from the eliminated candidate to the remaining candid...

Self‐Reported Understanding of Ranked‐Choice Voting

“…Neely and McDaniel () report that overvotes were more common under San Francisco's RCV elections in minority precincts, and attributed this to demands placed on minority voters. McDaniel () also attributed demographic differences in aggregate turnout patterns to the complexity of RCV, and Neely and Cook () also found racial differences in aggregate overvote patterns. In contrast, Kimball and Anthony () reported RCV had little to do with ballot completion.…”

Ranked Choice Voting and Attitudes toward Democracy in the United States: Results from a Survey Experiment

“…However, many RCV elections never needed to go past the first round of voting (Quinn ), and the system caused confusion among voters and poll workers—particularly among nonwhite voters—that strained the capacity of election officials (Cook and Latterman ; The 2007‐2008 Civil Grand Jury for the City and County of San Francisco, ; Zambon ). Other evidence from San Francisco indicates that RCV elections increase information costs and decrease turnout, particularly among black voters (McDaniel ). Since most of the cities that use RCV are “highly educated, progressive, and innovative” (Henry ), this raises questions of whether other areas with less educated populations would be able to adapt to RCV rules.…”

New urban governance: A review of current themes and future priorities

“…We need governance solutions that are inclusive but that nonetheless meet the technical challenges of the 21st century. All of this will have to be accomplished in a context where globalization (Brenner, 1999;Servon & Pink, 2015), increasing inequalities (Lee et al, 2015;McDaniel, 2016), climate change (Kwon, Jang, & Feiock, 2014;United Nations, 2015a), and rapid technological development (Greenfield, 2017;Macmanus et al, 2013) are key disrupting forces. But before attempting to deal with all of these hugely complex dilemmas, we first need to understand how urban governance works and how much it is dependent on context.…”