Reality: The vast majority of voters who use IRV easily understand it – and they like it.

Opponents of IRV try to make it sound complicated.  It’s not.

Whether voters fully understand all of the details of how their ranked ballot is tallied, the record shows repeatedly that voters have no difficulty using the ranked ballots effectively. For example, fully 99.9% of the IRV ballots cast in the Burlington, VT elections have been valid ballots. In most cities using IRV, more than 99 percent of the voters properly complete their ranked ballots.

(1) More ballots had errors among absentee voters, a difference which can easily be addressed with additional voter education. In most jurisdictions, ballot error rates are low regardless of the amount of machine error notification provided to voters at the polls. Some cities use equipment at the polls, some don't. More than a third of voters in San Francisco, for example, now vote by mail, but error rates in IRV races remain extremely low.

Strong voter education and good ballot design are the most important means of minimizing voter error. These standards have been implemented across the United States and exit polls clearly show that voters overwhelmingly understand IRV and prefer it over the old systems.

In a 2008 survey, 60 percent of respondents in Cary, NC (not all of whom were voters and familiar with the system) indicated they understood IRV and 69 percent said they preferred it over the old runoff system.

African Americans (62.5 percent) and seniors aged 65 and older (66.6 percent) were the most likely to understand IRV. And they were the most likely to say they support the city using it: 74 percent of African Americans and 79.4 percent of seniors. Lower income groups were also more likely to support it, with the group most likely to support IRV earning between $20,000-$30,000.

Every exit poll taken during the first-time use of IRV in US cities are clear in showing that voters overwhelmingly prefer IRV over the old system. 

While a new voting method may be unfamiliar to some voters, the record – as opposed to opponents’ rhetoric – shows that the change need not translate into confusion and that there’s no valid reason to doubt Saint Paul voters’ ability to adapt to a new way of voting. The evidence very clearly shows that the vast majority of voters in cities using IRV understand how to use it. 

Sources:

• San Francisco, CA
• Burlington, VT
• Takoma Park, MD
• Cary, NC
• Hendersonville, NC