By Luther Weeks on March 21, 2013
On Wednesday night I participated on a panel in Waterford, CT on Electoral Dysfunction, sponsored by the ACLU, Common Cause and the LWV. It was a very good discussion with a variety of views from the panel, a wide range of excellent questions, and unsurpassed moderation. In the near future we may have video available. I promised to provide more information here on the topics covered.
Posted in CT Law, Instant Runoff Voting, Legislature2013, National Popular Vote, Post-Election Audits
By Luther Weeks on December 23, 2011
We have often articulated our concerns with Instant Run-Off Voting also often called Ranked-Choice Voting. This article from the New York Times provides some further confirmation of our concerns
Posted in Instant Runoff Voting
By Luther Weeks on July 30, 2010
Recently we posted and commented on an article in The Day, covering the Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) proposal for New London. The article quoted Secretary of the State Bysiewicz on the constitutionality of the IRV and if our AccuVote-OS scanners could be used for an IRV election. The post prompted comments and the need for more complete answers. We queried the Secretary of the State’s Office and Jeff Silvestro, General Manager of LHS Associates. Mr. Silvestro responded:
Posted in CT, Instant Runoff Voting
By Luther Weeks on July 28, 2010
“Instant Runoff Voting is a well intended idea, but does not work as advertised in real life elections. For that reason, several jurisdictions have rejected IRV after one or two implementations.”
“There’s no point to it, Why go to something like this? Most people don’t understand it. Most people don’t want it.”
Posted in CT, Instant Runoff Voting
By Luther Weeks on July 25, 2010
The Day points to the complexity of issues for voters with several charter changes combined, especially Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), while referencing the Secretary of the State’s objections that IRV cannot be counted by our optical scanners and that IRV is currently illegal in Connecticut.
Posted in CT, Instant Runoff Voting, Other Editorials
By Luther Weeks on June 15, 2010
We don’t know enough about the operation of New London to know if a strong mayor or council manager form of government would work best, but we note a tendency for people, when they are dissatisfied with their government or the results of the last election to try any cure that sounds like it would help. Something akin to “fighting the last war”.
Posted in CT, Instant Runoff Voting
By Luther Weeks on February 23, 2010
I debated testifying. The hearing was about the Citizens Election Program. IRV [Instant Runoff Voting] was really off topic. However, this was the first time to my knowledge that IRV has come up in the Legislature. Perhaps with a few words I could express an alternative view before a large number of legislators take a position; so that they would know that there are alternative views and significant concerns.
Posted in CT, Instant Runoff Voting, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on October 21, 2009
Tutorial information about Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) and associated concerns.
Posted in FAQ, Instant Runoff Voting, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on August 23, 2009
We side completely with the activists, they are on the side of democracy, integrity, and transparency of government. Beyond a CD ballots should be made available to the public, the actual ballots should be made available to the public.
Posted in Chain of Custody, CT, Instant Runoff Voting, National, Skulduggery and Errors
By Luther Weeks on January 3, 2009
Could IRV (Instant Runoff Voting) avoid recounts? A slew of stories from Minnesota claim that recounts are a headache and that IRV is the cure.
Recounting Is Not A Problem – Its A Symptom Of Election Integrity in Minnesota
Posted in FAQ, Instant Runoff Voting
