Burlington mayoral election, 2009

Last updated

The city of Burlington, Vermont held a mayoral election on March 3, 2009, the second election since the city approved instant-runoff voting (IRV) for use in mayoral elections in 2005. [1] The incumbent mayor Bob Kiss, who had served since 2006, ran for reelection as the VT Progressive candidate. [2] Unlike Burlington's first IRV mayoral election in 2006, the IRV winner in 2009 (Bob Kiss) was neither the same as the plurality winner (Republican candidate Kurt Wright) nor the Condorcet winner (Democratic candidate Andy Montroll). [3] [4] The results caused a post-election controversy regarding the IRV method, [5] such that IRV was repealed in March 2010 by a vote of 52% to 48%. [6] [7] [8]

Burlington, Vermont largest city in Vermont

Burlington is the most populous city in the U.S. state of Vermont and the seat of Chittenden County. It is located 45 miles (72 km) south of the Canada–United States border and 94 miles (151 km) south of Montreal. The city's population was 42,452 according to a 2015 U.S. census estimate. It is the least populous municipality in the United States to be the most populous incorporated area in a state.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a type of ranked preferential voting method used in single-seat elections with more than two candidates. Instead of indicating support for only one candidate, voters in IRV elections can rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each voter's top choice. If a candidate has more than half of the vote based on first-choices, that candidate wins. If not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. The voters who selected the defeated candidate as a first choice then have their votes added to the totals of their next choice. This process continues until a candidate has more than half of the votes. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an "instant runoff" that allows a comparison of the top two candidates head-to-head.

Bob Kiss is a Vermont politician and former 39th Mayor of Burlington, Vermont. Kiss was a member of the Vermont House of Representatives from January 2001 until he stepped down to assume office as mayor of Burlington, following his election to that office on March 7, 2006. He is a member of the Vermont Progressive Party and one of roughly a dozen Progressives who have held or hold seats in the Vermont General Assembly. Kiss won re-election in 2009, and was endorsed by Vermont's Independent U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders. In November 2011, Kiss announced that he would not seek a third term as Mayor of Burlington.

Contents

Instant-runoff voting in Burlington

The city of Burlington, Vermont approved IRV for use in mayoral elections with a 64% vote in 2005, [9] at a time when IRV was only used in a few local elections in the United States. [10] The 2006 Burlington mayoral race was decided after two rounds of IRV tallying, selecting candidate Bob Kiss of the Vermont Progressive Party (VPP). In the election, Kiss prevailed over opponents Hinda Miller, Democrat, and Kevin Curley, Republican. With his election Kiss became the second member of the VPP to be elected to the office (Peter Clavelle was the first).

Vermont Progressive Party Socially democratic third party

The Vermont Progressive Party is a political party in the United States founded in 1999 and active only in the state of Vermont. The party is largely social democratic and progressive.

Hinda Miller is a former Democratic member of the Vermont State Senate, representing the Chittenden senate district. Miller is also known for her part in the invention of the sports bra.

Democratic Party (United States) political party in the United States

The Democratic Party is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the Republican Party. Tracing its heritage back to Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's Democratic-Republican Party, the modern-day Democratic Party was founded around 1828 by supporters of Andrew Jackson, making it the world's oldest active political party.

Candidates

Results

Unlike Burlington's first IRV mayoral election in 2006, the mayoral race in 2009 was decided in three rounds. Bob Kiss won the election, receiving 28.8% of the vote in the first round, and receiving 48% in the final round, defeating final challenger Kurt Wright (who received more votes than Kiss in the earlier rounds, but only received 45.2% in the final round).

Burlington mayoral election, 2009 (Summary analysis)
PartyCandidateMaximum
Round		Maximum
Votes		Share in
Maximum
Round		Maximum Votes
First Round VotesTransfer Votes
Progressive Bob Kiss 34,31348.0%
​​
Republican Kurt Wright34,06145.2%
​​
Democratic Andy Montroll22,55428.4%
​​
Independent Dan Smith11,30614.5%
​​
Green James Simpson1350.4%
​​
Write-in1360.4%
​​
Exhausted votes6066.7%
​​

The elimination rounds were as follows: [11] [12]

Candidates1st Round2nd Round3rd Round
CandidatePartyVotes%±Votes%±Votes%
Bob Kiss Progressive 258528.8%+396298133.2%+1332431348.0%
Kurt Wright Republican 295132.9%+343329436.7%+767406145.2%
Andy Montroll Democrat 206323.0%+491255428.4%-255400.0%
Dan Smith Independent 130614.5%-130600.0% 00.0%
James Simpson Green 350.4%-3500.0% 00.0%
Write-in 360.4%-3600.0% 00.0%
EXHAUSTED PILE 40.0%+1471511.7%+4556066.7%
TOTALS8980100.0%8980100.0%8980100.0%

Analysis of the 2009 election

The election is considered a success by IRV advocates such as FairVote, asserting it prevented the election of the presumed winner under a plurality system by avoiding the effect of vote-splitting between the other candidates, [13] was easy for voters to understand, [14] avoided the need for traditional runoffs, [14] [15] and "contributed to producing a campaign among four serious candidates that was widely praised for its substantive nature." [13]

FairVote is a 501(c)(3) organization that advocates electoral reform in the United States.

Vote splitting is an electoral effect in which the distribution of votes among multiple similar candidates reduces the chance of winning for any of the similar candidates, and increases the chance of winning for a dissimilar candidate.

This analysis ignores that the IRV outcome is a result of vote-splitting: Andy Montroll defeated Bob Kiss in the pairwise contest, and was eliminated in the second round of IRV due to vote-splitting with both candidates. Kurt Wright acted as a spoiler candidate, splitting the vote against Bob Kiss; Wright received more votes than Montroll due to Kiss acting as a spoiler candidate and splitting the vote against Wright.

Critics claimed the system is convoluted, [15] did nothing to increase voter turnout, [15] turned voting into a "gambling game" due to non-monotonicity, [16] [17] [18] and "eliminated the most popular moderate candidate and elected an extremist". [17] The election did demonstrate that voters are capable of using ranked-choice ballots, with 99.99% of the ballots filled out correctly, [13] though this includes 16% of voters who bullet-voted for only one candidate. [19]

The monotonicity criterion is a voting system criterion used to evaluate both single and multiple winner ranked voting systems. A ranked voting system is monotonic if it is neither possible to prevent the election of a candidate by ranking them higher on some of the ballots, nor possible to elect an otherwise unelected candidate by ranking them lower on some of the ballots . In single winner elections that is to say no winner is harmed by up-ranking and no loser can win by down-ranking. Douglas R. Woodall called the criterion mono-raise.

Ranked voting

Ranked voting describes certain voting systems in which voters rank outcomes in a hierarchy on the ordinal scale. In some areas ranked-choice voting is called preferential voting, but in other places this term has various other meanings.

Bullet voting is a voting tactic, usually in multiple-winner elections, where a voter is entitled to vote for more than one candidate, but instead votes for only one candidate.

Moreover, the election is considered a failure of IRV by other voting reform advocates, because the Condorcet winner [16] [20] [21] [22] [23] (and likely most-approved/highest-rated) candidate did not win. [24] [25] The IRV winner in 2009 (incumbent and VT Progressive candidate Bob Kiss) was neither the same as the plurality winner (Republican candidate Kurt Wright) nor the Condorcet winner (Democratic candidate Andy Montroll). [3] [26]

Cardinal voting

Cardinal voting refers to any electoral system which allows the voter to give each candidate an independent rating or grade. These are also referred to as "rated", "evaluative", "graded", or "absolute" voting systems. Cardinal methods and ordinal methods are two main categories of modern voting systems, along with plurality voting.

Republican Party (United States) political party in the United States

The Republican Party, also referred to as the GOP, is one of the two major political parties in the United States; the other is its historic rival, the Democratic Party.

Condorcet method class of voting systems that satisfy the Condorcet critereon

A Condorcet method is an election method that elects the candidate that would win a majority of the vote in all of the head-to-head elections against each of the other candidates, whenever there is such a candidate. A candidate with this property is called the Condorcet winner. Voting methods that always elect the Condorcet winner, when one exists, satisfy the Condorcet criterion.

Pairwise preference combinations: [24] [27]

       
wiJSDSKWBKAM
 AMAndy

Montroll (5–0)

5 Wins ↓
 BKBob

Kiss (4–1)

1 Loss →

↓ 4 Wins

4067 (AM) –

3477 (BK)

 KWKurt

Wright (3–2)

2 Losses →

3 Wins ↓

4314 (BK) –

4064 (KW)

4597 (AM) –

3668 (KW)

 DSDan

Smith (2–3)

3 Losses →

2 Wins ↓

3975 (KW) –

3793 (DS)

3946 (BK) –

3577 (DS)

4573 (AM) –

2998 (DS)

 JSJames

Simpson (1–4)

4 Losses →

1 Win ↓

5573 (DS) –

721 (JS)

5274 (KW) –

1309 (JS)

5517 (BK) –

845 (JS)

6267 (AM) –

591 (JS)

 wiWrite-in (0–5)5 Losses →3338 (JS) –

165 (wi)

6057 (DS) –

117 (wi)

6063 (KW) –

163 (wi)

6149 (BK) –

116 (wi)

6658 (AM) –

104 (wi)

This leads to an overall preference ranking of: [27]

  1. Montroll – defeats all candidates below, including Kiss (4067 to 3477)
  2. Kiss – defeats all candidates below, including Wright (4314 to 4064)
  3. Wright – defeats all candidates below, including Smith (3975 to 3793)
  4. Smith – defeats Simpson (5573 to 721) and the write-in candidates
  5. Simpson – defeats only the write-in candidates (3338 to 165 for all write-in candidates combined)

Hypothetical results under various voting systems: [25] [27] [24]

Repeal of IRV in Burlington

There was post-election controversy regarding the IRV method, leading to the repeal of IRV in Burlington. [28] In late 2009, a group of several Democrats led a signature drive to force a referendum on the election method (supported by Republican Kurt Wright). [29] According to a local columnist, the vote was a referendum on Mayor Kiss, who was a "lame duck" because of a scandal relating to Burlington Telecom and other local issues. [15] However, in an interview with Vermont Public Radio, Mayor Kiss disputed that claim, [30] and those gathering signatures for the repeal stated that it was specifically a rejection of IRV. [15] IRV was repealed in March 2010 by a vote of 52% to 48%. [31] [32] [33]

The repeal reverted the system back to a 40% rule that requires a top-two runoff if no candidate exceeds 40% of the vote. Had the 2009 election occurred under these rules, Kiss and Wright would have advanced to the runoff. If the same voters had participated in the runoff as in the first election and not changed their preferences, Kiss would have won the runoff. [34] In 2011, an initiative effort to increase the winning threshold from the 40% plurality to a 50% majority failed.[ citation needed ]

Related Research Articles

Approval voting

Approval voting is a single-winner electoral system where each voter may select ("approve") any number of candidates. The winner is the most-approved candidate.

Score voting or range voting is an electoral system for single-seat elections, in which voters give each candidate a score, the scores are added, and the candidate with the highest total is elected. It has been described by various other names including evaluative voting, utilitarian voting, the point system, ratings summation, 0-99 voting, average voting, and utilityvoting. It is a type of cardinal voting electoral system.

Two-round system voting system used to elect a single winner where a second round of voting is used if no candidate wins an absolute majority in the first round

The two-round system is a voting method used to elect a single winner, where the voter casts a single vote for their chosen candidate. However, if no candidate receives the required number of votes, then those candidates having less than a certain proportion of the votes, or all but the two candidates receiving the most votes, are eliminated, and a second round of voting is held.

Bucklin voting is a class of voting methods that can be used for single-member and multi-member districts. It is named after its original promoter, the Georgist politician James W. Bucklin of Grand Junction, Colorado, and is also known as the Grand Junction system. As in Majority Judgment, the Bucklin winner will be one of the candidates with the highest median ranking or rating.

The Condorcet candidate is the person who would win a two-candidate election against each of the other candidates in a plurality vote. For a set of candidates, the Condorcet winner is always the same regardless of the voting system in question. A voting system satisfies the Condorcet criterion if it always chooses the Condorcet winner when one exists. Any voting method conforming to the Condorcet criterion is known as a Condorcet method.

The participation criterion is a voting system criterion. Voting systems that fail the participation criterion are said to exhibit the no show paradox and allow a particularly unusual strategy of tactical voting: abstaining from an election can help a voter's preferred choice win. The criterion has been defined as follows:

Resolvability criterion can refer to any voting system criterion that ensures a low possibility of tie votes.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a voting method used in single-seat elections with more than two candidates. Instead of voting only for a single candidate, voters in IRV elections can rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice, losing candidates are eliminated, and ballots for losing candidates are redistributed until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an "instant runoff" that allows a comparison of the top two candidates head-to-head.

A single-member district or single-member constituency is an electoral district that returns one officeholder to a body with multiple members such as a legislature. This is also sometimes called single-winner voting or winner takes all. The alternative are multi-member districts, or the election of a body by the whole electorate voting as one constituency.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is used for state and congressional elections in Maine and for local elections in 11 cities, where it is often called "ranked-choice voting." Those cities include San Francisco, California; Oakland, California; Berkeley, California; San Leandro, California; Takoma Park, Maryland; Basalt, Colorado; Telluride, Colorado; St. Paul, Minnesota; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Portland, Maine. It is pending implementation in several additional cities, including in 2019 in Las Cruces, New Mexico and St. Louis Park, Minnesota. IRV is commonly used for student government and other non-governmental elections.

The Borda count is a family of single-winner election methods in which voters rank options or candidates in order of preference. The Borda count determines the outcome of a debate or the winner of an election by giving each candidate, for each ballot, a number of points corresponding to the number of candidates ranked lower. Once all votes have been counted the option or candidate with the most points is the winner. The Borda count is intended to elect broadly-acceptable options or candidates, rather than those preferred by a majority, and so is often described as a consensus-based voting system rather than a majoritarian one.

Electoral system method by which voters make a choice between options

An electoral system is a set of rules that determine how elections and referendums are conducted and how their results are determined. Political electoral systems are organized by governments, while non-political elections may take place in business, non-profit organisations and informal organisations.

STAR voting

STAR voting is an electoral system for single-seat elections. The name stands for "Score then Automatic Runoff", referring to the fact that this system is a combination of score voting, to pick two frontrunners with the highest total scores, followed by a "virtual runoff" in which the frontrunner who is preferred on more ballots wins. It is a type of cardinal voting electoral system.

Tideman's Alternative Methods, including Alternative Smith and Alternative Schwartz, are two electoral systems developed by Nicolaus Tideman which select a single winner using votes that express preferences. These methods can also create a sorted list of winners.

References

  1. ↑ 4. How did this change to IRV come about? Over 64% of Burlington voters voted in favor of the IRV Charter amendment in March, 2005, and it went into effect on May 12, 2005, when the governor signed the ratification bill, H.505, which had been passed by both the House and Senate.
  2. ↑ "Mayor Bob Kiss". City of Burlington. Archived from the original on 2007-11-29. Retrieved 2007-11-16.
  3. 1 2 "Point/Counterpoint: Terry Bouricious Attempts To Rip Professor Gierzynski A New One Over Instant Runoff Voting Controversy (Now With All New Gierzynski Update!)". Archived from the original on July 26, 2011. Retrieved December 30, 2010.
  4. ↑ "Burlington Vermont 2009 IRV mayoral election". RangeVoting.org. Retrieved 2016-04-01.
  5. ↑ Baruth, Philip (March 12, 2009). "Voting Paradoxes and Perverse Outcomes: Political Scientist Tony Gierzynski Lays Out A Case Against Instant Runoff Voting". Vermont Daily Briefing. Archived from the original on July 26, 2011.
  6. ↑ "Burlington voters repeal IRV". Wcax.com. March 2, 2010. Archived from the original on 2016-04-09. Retrieved March 28, 2016.
  7. ↑ "Instant run-off voting experiment ends in Burlington : Rutland Herald Online". Rutlandherald.com. 2010-04-27. Archived from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2016-04-01.
  8. ↑ Briggs, John (March 3, 2010). "Instant runoff rejected". The Burlington Free Press.
  9. ↑ 4. How did this change to IRV come about? Over 64% of Burlington voters voted in favor of the IRV Charter amendment in March, 2005, and it went into effect on May 12, 2005, when the governor signed the ratification bill, H.505, which had been passed by both the House and Senate.
  10. ↑ Sneyd, Ross (2006-03-16). "Vt. City Offers Instant Runoff in Race". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2006-03-16. Retrieved 2018-06-03.
  11. ↑ "ChoicePlus Pro 2009 Burlington Mayor Round Detail Report". 2011-07-25. Archived from the original on 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2018-01-03.
  12. ↑ "ChoicePlus Pro 2009 Burlington Mayor Round 4 Report". March 3, 2009. Archived from the original on 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2011-02-28.
  13. 1 2 3 Bouricius, Terry (17 March 2009). "Response to Faulty Analysis of Burlington IRV Election". FairVote.org. Retrieved 1 October 2017. successfully prevented the election of the candidate who would likely have won under plurality rules, but would have lost to either of the other top finishers in a runoff
  14. 1 2 Etnier, Carl (2009-03-06). "Instant runoff was success". Rutland Herald. Retrieved 2018-03-17.
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 Totten, Shay. "Burlington Residents Seek Repeal of Instant Runoff Voting". Seven Days. Retrieved 2018-03-17. We waited to bring in the signatures because we didn't want this to be about Kurt Wright losing after being ahead, or Andy Montroll who had more first and second place votes and didn't win. We wanted this to be about IRV.
  16. 1 2 Ornstein, Joseph T.; Norman, Robert Z. (2014-10-01). "Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections". Public Choice. 161 (1–2): 1–9. doi:10.1007/s11127-013-0118-2. ISSN   0048-5829. Although the Democrat was the Condorcet winner (a majority of voters preferred him in all two way contests), he received the fewest first-place votes and so was eliminated .. 2009 mayoral election in Burlington, VT, which illustrates the key features of an upward monotonicity failure
  17. 1 2 Dopp, Kathy (June 10, 2009). "IRV much worse than old runoffs". The Aspen Times. Retrieved 2018-03-17.
  18. ↑ Felsenthal, Dan S.; Tideman, Nicolaus (2014). "Interacting double monotonicity failure with direction of impact under five voting methods". Mathematical Social Sciences. 67: 57–66. doi:10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2013.08.001. ISSN   0165-4896. A display of non-monotonicity under the Alternative Vote method was reported recently, for the March 2009 mayoral election in Burlington, Vermont.
  19. ↑ "Voter Paradox in the 2009 Burlington IRV Mayoral Race" (PDF). Figure: Percent of voters who made a 1st choice, 2nd choice, etc., 2006 and 2009 Burlington mayoral election. 2 choices = 83.5%
  20. ↑ Donovan, Todd (2017-04-01). Changing How America Votes. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN   9781442276086. it is possible that a candidate who would beat each of the other candidates in a head-to-head contest still loses an election with RCV rules ... this particular unusual result seems to have occurred in a 2009 mayoral election in Burlington, Vermont
  21. ↑ Ellenberg, Jordan (2014-05-29). How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking. Penguin. ISBN   9780698163843. a majority of voters liked the centrist candidate Montroll better than Kiss, and a majority of voters liked Montroll better than Wright ... yet Montroll was tossed in the first round.
  22. ↑ Stensholt, Eivind (2015-10-07). "What Happened in Burlington?". NHH Dept. of Business and Management Science. Rochester, NY. Discussion Paper No. 2015/26. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2670462. SSRN   2670462 . K was elected even though M was a clear Condorcet winner and W was a clear Plurality winner.
  23. ↑ Lewyn, Michael (2012). "Two Cheers for Instant Runoff Voting". 6 Phoenix L. Rochester, NY. Rev. 117. SSRN   2276015 . election where Democratic candidate for mayor was Condorcet winner but finished third behind Republican and 'Progressive'
  24. 1 2 3 4 Olson, Brian (2009). "2009 Burlington Mayor IRV Failure". bolson.org. Retrieved 1 October 2017. This is an IRV failure. The IRV result is clearly not what people actually wanted. More people liked Montroll over Kiss than the other way around, but IRV elected the loser.
  25. 1 2 3 Gierzynski, Anthony; Hamilton, Wes; Smith, Warren D. (March 2009). "Burlington Vermont 2009 IRV mayoral election". RangeVoting.org. Retrieved 1 October 2017. Montroll was favored over Republican Kurt Wright 56% to 44% ... and over Progressive Bob Kiss 54% to 46% ... In other words, in voting terminology, Montroll was a 'beats-all winner,' also called a 'Condorcet winner' ... However, in the IRV election, Montroll came in third! ... voters preferred Montroll over every other candidate ... Montroll is the most-approved
  26. ↑ "Burlington Vermont 2009 IRV mayoral election". RangeVoting.org. Retrieved 2016-04-01.
  27. 1 2 3 "2009 Burlington, Vermont Mayoral Election". Electowiki. Retrieved 2018-01-03.
  28. ↑ Gierzynski, Tony (March 12, 2009). "Voting Paradoxes and Perverse Outcomes: Political Scientist Tony Gierzynski Lays Out A Case Against Instant Runoff Voting". Vermont Daily Briefing. Archived from the original on 2015-10-19. Retrieved 2017-09-27.
  29. ↑ "One Person, One Vote Press Conference". CCTV Center for Media and Democracy. 2009-12-29. Retrieved 2018-04-10.
  30. ↑ "Bob Kiss on IRV, Burlington Telecom and the Moran Plant – VPR Archive". vprarchive.vpr.net. Retrieved 2018-04-10.
  31. ↑ "Burlington voters repeal IRV". Wcax.com. March 2, 2010. Archived from the original on 2016-04-09. Retrieved March 28, 2016.
  32. ↑ "Instant run-off voting experiment ends in Burlington : Rutland Herald Online". Rutlandherald.com. 2010-04-27. Archived from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2016-04-01.
  33. ↑ Briggs, John (March 3, 2010). "Instant runoff rejected". The Burlington Free Press.
  34. ↑ "City of Burlington, Vermont | Instant Runoff Voting". 2011-09-28. Archived from the original on 2011-09-28. Retrieved 2018-04-08. – FAQ 5. for IRV: Under the old [pre-IRV] system a candidate could be elected with just over 40% of the vote, meaning a candidate could win even though seen as the last choice of nearly 60% of the voters .
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.