Minnesota Debacle Points To Need For Electoral Reform
If we compare the process of determining the winners in two recent Senate races, it is obvious that our electoral system is badly in need of reform. In the November general elections, Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss of Georgia faced challengers from both the Democratic and Libertarian parties. Chambliss won 49.8% of the votes cast in the three-way race, and had a winning margin of nearly 110,000 votes.
In spite of the sizable margin, Georgia law called for a run-off election since no candidate broke the 50% threshold. On December 2nd, a run-off was held between the top 2 finishers in the race. Chambliss garnered 57.4% of the total votes cast for a decisive victory that cannot be called into question.
In the Minnesota Senate race, incumbent Norm Coleman faced Democrat Al Franken, along with 3 other third-party challengers. Coleman and Franken both won approximately 41% of the total votes cast, while the third party candidates garnered a combined total of nearly 17%. For the sake of comparison, the total for the Libertarian candidate in Georgia was only 3.4% of the votes cast.
In a prolonged and hotly contested recount procedure, the margin between Coleman and Franken has never been greater than a few hundred votes. In percentage terms, this difference is well within the margin of error for the imprecise science of counting ballots by hand. The same 2.8 million ballots could be recounted by hand any number of times and never produce the same final tally.
The Constitution leaves the conduct of elections up to the states, but the procedural differences between states creates a problem for the nation as a whole. Georgia law calls for a run-off, even in a case where a clear winner emerges in the general election. Minnesota law has no provision for a run-off, even when it is not possible to determine a statistically reliable margin of victory on the basis of a recount.
Georgia was able to hold a run-off and produce an undisputed winner within one month of the general election. The recount in Minnesota is likely to drag on for months, and the ultimate winner will be chosen by the courts and not by the voters. If Minnesota law allowed for the run-off procedure, a clear winner would have emerged already between Coleman and Franken, and whoever was ultimately elected would go to Washington with a clear mandate rather than a cloud of illegitimacy.
I find it altogether inappropriate that litigation has become an acceptable way to settle an election, be it presidential or otherwise. You’re absolutely right in calling for electoral reform in states that permit this sort of undemocratic solution.
The first protest that’s always raised when the prospect of a run-off is voiced is the cost of administering another election. I for one would be more than happy to throw some money into the hat to ensure my voice is clearly heard and that an imposter is not sent to represent me in Washington. I have a feeling that the majority of Americans feel the same way…
Ben,
My guess is that by the time the legal battles are over in Minnesota, the final cost will be comparable to a run-off.
Forget to cost to the state of running an election, \aA run-off is pretty dubious solution because a run-off gives huge advantage to whatever party or candidate happens to be able to raise a lot of additional money on short notice. Turnout is always lower in a run-off. Moreover, there is no guarantee that a run-off will not end up being within 225 votes.
John,
Nothing is guaranteed, but a run-off between the top two candidates in the field is far more likely to produce a clear winner than a five way race. As much as I support the rights of third party candidates, there is no question that they tend to skew the results. We should never allow the cost of determining a winner be the overriding factor in our decisions. Minnesota will pay a big price for the recount and the legal battle, and an even bigger price for not having a Senator in place when the economic stimulus feeding frenzy begins.
I’m sad that Saxby lost. As a Republican I wanted a 60 seat Democratic Senate so they could pass what ever convoluted bills they wanted and they couldn’t blame anyone but themselves if they couldn’t get the necessary votes.
Forget bi-partisan. Give Obama and the other Democrats all the power so there is no one else to blame.