Tom Rose, 2010 Libertarian candidate for U.S. Congress from N.C. District 2, is an experienced businessman and an instant friend to many who have met him. He’s the type of guy that many District 2 residents can identify with and respect as part of their community. He’s also a staunch Libertarian, and he’s been successful winning supporters when has a chance to speak to them and talk about their biggest concerns.
So why don’t the election numbers reflect this?
The voters can tell you that in their own words: they wouldn’t vote for Rose because they either (1) want to keep Ellmers from winning or (2) want to keep Etheridge from winning. Because they only have one vote, Rose loses support simply out of voter fear.
But Rose *did* beat the spread in what’s becoming a contested race where every ballot will be carefully counted. To date, neither Etheridge (48.64%) nor Ellmers (49.52%) can claim to have a majority of voters’ support. Unofficial results show the following:
- Etheridge-Ellmers spread: 1,646
- Rose’s total votes: 3,463
Now imagine that everyone who voted had a chance to vote for a second choice. As it stands, we don’t know how the 3,463 people who voted for Rose would have otherwise voted, or even if they would have shown up to the polls at all. With Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), though, we could find out. If you voted in the 2010 General Election in N.C., you saw the state’s first use of IRV for a judicial seat that came open after the primary had been held. It was a long list of names, certainly, but it was easy to see that the left column was your first choice, the middle was your second, and so forth.
Here’s how IRV could have changed the District 2 race and led to a true majority result:
- Those voting for Rose as their first choice could have put Ellmers or Etheridge as
their second choice, confident that the vote would still make a difference even if
Rose didn’t get the percentage he’d need to win.
- Those voting for Ellmers or Etheridge as their first choice could have put Rose as
their second choice as a statement that they’re opposed to the alternative.
- Those who didn’t show up to the poll because they felt their votes wouldn’t make
a difference may have shown up and voted with confidence that their votes really
matter.
Will IRV grow in N.C.? I think it will for non-partisan seats, but I’m not sure about partisan races. The reasons state officials will give in opposition are the apparent concerns about long ballots and “voter confusion” on ballots. It’s the same arguments they have used in their defense against the Libertarian and Green parties who are suing the state for its unconstitutional ballot access laws. However, I think IRV has a chance for wide-spread adoption if grassroots activists will promote its logical benefits. One of the benefits that could ring true with all voters is how it can ultimately save taxpayer money: less money (for labor and ballot printing) is to put into special, low-attended runoff elections, plus less labor-intensive ballot counting is needed to determine the final winner in races with 3+ candidates.
Would IRV allow Libertarians to grow? That’s a hard call, but my instinct after seeing the Libertarian impact in two-way races across the state says “yes.” I have met more than one voter since Tuesday that said, “I voted for you, and I would have voted for Beitler, but I didn’t want [Burr to be re-elected] or [Marshall to win].” These voters are afraid to say “this is who I want to win” because they don’t want to risk electing someone they definitely do not want to win. IRV would encourage those voters to vote with confidence rather than out of fear.
I’m proud and excited that Tom Rose had 3,463 votes in a race where the winner may win by less than half of that. It’s is a big statement, and I think we should use this as an opportunity to show how IRV could have truly made a difference.