It has been an enlightening civics lesson.

But as Minnesota's 2008 U.S. Senate recount drags on - voters might have to wait until 2009 for a result - many can't help but wonder if there is a better way to run an election.

Jeanne Massey says there is.

"Instant Runoff Voting would likely mean that we wouldn't be in a recount situation," she said.

Massey is the executive director of FairVote Minnesota, a group advocating Instant Runoff Voting, or IRV, a system in which voters rank candidates on their Election-Day ballots and get a winner, without a recount.

"Voters are asked to go to a voting booth and rank candidates in order of preference," Massey explained. "First, second, third choice."

On Election Day, voters would fill in ovals next to more than one candidate, giving a "1st choice" vote to the person they like best, a "2nd choice" vote to the person they could live with if their first choice didn't win, and so on.

The candidate with the fewest first-choice vote is eliminated, and then second-choice votes are added to the totals of candidates left standing.

That's how it worked in the 1990 presidential election in Ireland. Candidate Austin Currie garnered only 18 percent of the first-choice votes, compared to 38 percent for Mary Robinson and 44 percent for Brian Lenihan.

When Currie was eliminated, the second-choice votes on Currie's ballots were distributed among the two remaining candidates. Those second-choice votes favored Robinson by a 5-1 margin, which meant Robinson added 15 percent to her total, and Lenihan added 3.

Robinson ended up winning the election, with 53 percent of the combined first- and second-choice votes, even though she was in second place after the first round of counting.

"That just means, at the end of the day, whoever is elected has the support of the majority of voters," Massey said.

But it may not be that simple.

Andy Cilek's group, the Minnesota Voters Alliance, is suing to block IRV in Minneapolis, where voters approved it two years ago for use elections in city elections.

"I think it's flawed in a number of ways," Cilek said. "Some people get a first choice and a second choice counted, while others only get their first-choice votes counted."

Cilek argues it violates the "one person, one vote" principal.

But IRV has survived court challenges in other states, and seven other U.S. cities currently use it in their local elections.

In Minneapolis, IRV can't be implemented until the court challenges end. Both sides believe it could be appealed all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

If IRV survives in Minneapolis, Saint Paul plans to follow the larger city's lead and put IRV on the ballot so voters can decide if it does indeed sound like a better system.

Click here to see Video.