Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ covers the 10 most-often-asked questions regarding IRV. For a more comprehensive list of questions and answers, please click here.

What is instant runoff voting?

Instant runoff voting (IRV) is an electoral method that elects officeholders with a majority of the vote in a single election. IRV eliminates the need for a separate runoff election. Voters rank their favorite candidates in order of choice (1, 2, 3) on their ballot, and the runoff rankings are used to determine the majority winner instantly.

How is IRV different from what Los Angeles currently uses for local elections?

Currently Los Angeles uses a two-round runoff system to elect its local officeholders. One election is held in early March, and if no candidate wins a majority of the vote, a second election between the top two finishers is held in May. This separate runoff election costs taxpayers millions of dollars, and often leads to extremely low voter turnout – only 6% in the May 2007 runoff. With IRV, candidates win by gaining a majority of voter support, but IRV produces final results in a single election, eliminating the need for the second election.

Could using IRV boost voter turnout?

Yes. With the current system, voter participation is usually very low: only 10 percent of registered voters participated in the March 2007 election, followed by 6 percent turnout in the May 15 runoff, a 40 percent decline. Turnout in the precincts was even lower, only 1 percent, with some precincts having no voters at all! With IRV, voters, candidates, and organizations can focus all their resources and efforts on a single election, thereby maximizing voter participation. Having one election instead of two prevents voter fatigue that contributes to low turnout.

Can IRV lead to cost savings?

Yes. IRV combines the primary and runoff elections into one election, getting rid of the high costs of administering the second election. Since 1993, the City of LA, LA Unified School District and LA Community College District have spent $31 million administering runoff elections. From 2001 to 2005, the City of Los Angeles alone spent $9.2 million, $4.7 million in 2005 -- $40 per voter -- as costs have escalated in recent years. With IRV, all these unnecessary costs for a second election will be saved.

Will IRV require taxpayers to spend more money on voting equipment?

No. According to the City Clerk, Secretary of State Debra Bowen will not certify the City's voting equipment past the May 2009 election. As a result, the City will have to spend about $30 million for new voting equipment -- regardless of whether or not it adopts IRV. The new equipment will be able to handle IRV elections at no additional cost.

IRV is a win-win for the City of Los Angeles.

How does instant runoff voting work?

Instant runoff voting acts like a series of runoff elections. If any candidate receives a majority of the first choice rankings, that candidate is elected. If not, the last place candidate is defeated, just as in a runoff election, and all ballots are counted again, but this time each ballot cast for the defeated candidate counts for the next-choice candidate listed on each of those ballots. This process of eliminating the last place candidate and recounting the ballots continues until one candidate receives a majority of the vote. You can see a short interactive mini-movie of how IRV will work in LA, including how voters rank their ballots and how the ballots are counted, on the web at http://sfrcv.org/vote.

Who will be elected in Los Angeles using instant runoff voting?

IRV would be used to elect the mayor, city attorney, city council, controller, school board and community college board members.

How can we bring IRV to Los Angeles?

To bring IRV to Los Angeles, voters need to approve an amendment to the City Charter. First, a majority of the LA City Council needs to approve a bill to put IRV on the ballot. After the Mayor signs the bill, it will go on the ballot.

Right now, the City Council is studying IRV and how it will benefit our city and community. If the Council and the Mayor sign off on an IRV bill by July 2, IRV will be on the ballot this November.

Is instant runoff voting too confusing for voters?

Not at all. Many studies have examined if IRV elections used in various jurisdictions were confusing for voters. All the studies have found that voters handle ranking their ballots with ease. San Francisco State University’s Public Research Institute has conducted two exit poll studies and found that 87% of those who voted in San Francisco’s IRV elections felt they understood IRV – results that cut across all ethnic, age and gender lines. 60% of voters used all three of their rankings, and 61% preferred IRV over San Francisco’s old two round runoff system. Another poll by the Asian Law Caucus found similar results. The results undoubtedly were so positive because the role for voters is very simple—just rank as many of your favorite candidates as you wish, 1, 2, 3. It’s like going to Baskin Robbins 31 flavors of ice cream, and picking your top three flavors. We are used to ranking things all the time, from our favorite sports teams to our favorite videos and foods, so ranking candidates is easy.

Is IRV a fair and easy system for voters protected under the Voting Rights Act?

Yes. According to the San Francisco State studies, 87% of all voters said that they understood IRV. African Americans, Latinos, and Asians were the most likely groups to rank three candidates (the maximum possible). Latinos were most likely to say that ranking was easy or very easy (58%), and Latino voters had the smallest percentage of voters indicating some lack of understanding of the system, only 10%, and only 16% of African-Americans. Spanish first-language speakers had the smallest percentage of voters indicating some lack of understanding, only 9% versus 12% for English speakers. Voters whose first language was Spanish were considerably more likely than others to say that ranking candidates was easy or very easy, with almost two-thirds giving that response. Another exit poll by the Asian Law Caucus found that Asians overwhelmingly favored IRV.

Can IRV have an impact on the awful mudslinging and negative campaigning?

Yes. In recent LA elections, voters have been bombarded with nasty “hit” pieces, personal attacks and TV ads telling them the worst about their political leaders. In contrast, IRV discourages such mudslinging because candidates know they may need the second or third ranking from other candidates’ supporters to win. The result is a major shift in traditional campaign strategy. Instead of mudslinging, candidates have an incentive to run civil, issues-based campaigns and find common ground. Covering San Francisco’s IRV elections, one New York Times headline read: "New Runoff System in San Francisco Has the Rival Candidates Cooperating." Such coalition-building is certain to benefit the eventual winner when governing.

Will IRV prevent spoilers and vote-splitting?

Yes. With the current system, multiple candidates from the same constituency can “split” the vote, resulting in those candidates cancelling each other out. IRV’s ranked ballots allow voters to rank their first, second and third choices and to participate in coalitions among like-minded candidates, avoiding such vote-splitting.

What can I do to help?

1. Call or write your Councilmember, Council President Eric Garcetti, and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Tell our leaders to do their part to bring IRV to LA.

2. Spread the word. Tell your friends, family, and colleagues about IRV. When people understand how IRV works, they tend to support it. Other effective means are to get organizations you are a part of to support IRV, or write letters to the editor to local papers and newsletters.

3. Volunteer your time. We would love your help. Please feel free to contact us at 213.480.0994 or dutta@newamerica.net.