Environmentalist group says YES to San Juan County Charter Amendment Proposition 3
||| FROM BEN CHAPMAN for FAIRVOTE WASHINGTON |||
The Washington Conservation Voters is calling on voters in San Juan County to join the statewide and nationwide movement for ranked-choice voting by voting YES on San Juan County Charter Amendment 3.
Zachary Pullin of the Washington Conservation Voters said, “We know that Washingtonians care about our environment, but problems arise when politicians aren’t as accountable to us as they should be. Implementing ranked-choice voting is an exciting and proven way to empower voters to be heard on the issues that matter to them the most.”
Lisa Ayrault of FairVote Washington said, “We’re thrilled that the Washington Conservation Voters has endorsed ranked-choice voting! This is a simple, proven upgrade to our elections that could save time and money in San Juan County. Ranked-choice voting is already used in over 50 places across the country and voters overwhelmingly like it.”
Ranked-choice voting gives you the option to vote for candidates in the order you prefer: 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, and so on. If your favorite can’t win, your vote counts for your next choice.
Learn more about the Ranked-Choice Voting for San Juan County campaign on our website.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
San Juan County’s ballot measure to approve Ranked Choice Voting is predominately funded by folks and organizations outside of our county. Do these “outsiders” have the best interests of San Juan County at heart?
Mr. Chapman is on the staff of FairVote Washington in Bothell, a nonprofit corporation devoted to “educating the public on issues related to ranked choice voting.” FairVote Washington has actively campaigned for SJC Charter Amendment Proposition #3 and has been supporting the Registered Political Committee “Ranked Choice Voting for San Juan County – 2022” (RCV4SJC) since May 2022. RCV4SJC has an Eastsound postal address but a Seattle telephone number and a Seattle treasurer. Only three of the seven board members are from San Juan County.
As of Oct 31, 2022, RCV4SJC has raised $23,075 in cash contribution with $10,000 coming from FairVote Action, a nonprofit lobbying and political action organization in Maryland. Only $1,300 has been donated by residents of San Juan County. $1,400 has been contributed by board members of FairVote Washington. RDV4SJV has spent or committed $39,676 with much of that (more than $17,000) going back to FairVote Washington!
There are alternatives to Ranked Choice Voting such as Approval Voting (just check the boxes of those you approve) that may be simpler and can result in better voter satisfaction. We need to choose what is best for San Juan County.
Bill Bangs makes some good points in his posted comment. It is often useful to know where funding for any issue or candidate comes from. It’s also helpful to know the background of folks who support this or that issue. But to let these factors largely determine how one votes on any issue is questionable. An honest consideration of the pros and cons of the issue itself – not just where the funding originates or who may or may not support the issue – should play a part in one’s decision.
I often suspect that folks who dwell excessively on out-of-area funding – but fail to say much about the issue itself – are a bit concerned that looking in any detail at the issue might undercut their position, or at least not support it. Not saying Mr. Bangs is one of these folks, but he might have expanded a bit on his limited and somewhat ambiguous next to last sentence, which is all he really said about the issue itself. But surely no one could disagree with his last sentence.
.
Voting systems can be complex and all have consequences that may not be obvious at first glance. I and others have alluded to some of these issues in previous comments in the Orcasonian. The preponderance of funding in support of County Charter Proposition 3 from out of our county is merely a fact of the current campaign. And it does reinforce Mr. Whitman’s point that our decision on how to vote should be based on a full evaluation of the issues which may not be supported by paid advertising. I would prefer that we adopt Approval Voting (which is not on the ballot) which is discussed in: https://electionscience.org/library/approval-voting-versus-irv/.
I apologize for misspelling Prof. Whitmer’s name.
The proposal to put Ranked Choice Voting on the San Juan County ballot was initiated by numerous local citizens of San Juan County and led by elected members of the San Juan County Charter Review Commission. I am also aware of numerous island residents who contributed to Fair Vote Action and Fair Washington as a means of supporting the local San Juan County efforts. Suggesting that these funds should be consider entirely from “outsiders” is not an accurate depiction. Finally, I’m not sure a seattle phone number really matters anymore does it? I have a ridiculous number of long time island friends who have kept their seattle, New York, or in one of our mutual friend’s case, Palo Alto phone numbers. And…regarding the “seattle-based treasurer,” seriously? How many of our neighbors have an off island accountants and accept for one incredible individual who seems to help several organizations at once, I know of no other locals volunteers to be treasurers.
In the end, I find the arguments being made to be misinformed. Regardless of whether we support or do not support Ranked Choice Voting in San Juan County, I feel speaking to the specific pros and cons of the proposal will far better serve us all.
For me, a critical flaw in Ranked Choice Voting (aka Instant Runoff Voting) is the elimination of the candidate with the fewest first place votes no matter how many second place or approval votes they receive. This means that the candidate with the highest overall approval rating may not be elected. For example, suppose you have three candidates running : eXtreme A (XA), eXtreme B (XB), and Moderate (M). Suppose further that all of those favoring XA vote, in rank order, for (XA, M), those favoring XB vote for (XB,M), and those favoring M vote only for M. If M receives the fewest first place votes then they are eliminated and either XA or XB wins depending on who got more votes. This is exactly the same as our current system (only that the runoff is “instant”). But 100% of the voters ranked M second or higher, far more that either XA or XB. Approval voting would declare M the winner – I prefer Approval Voting: whoever gets the most (approval) votes wins, period.