Dear IRV Supporters:

Today, the Pioneer Press told its readers that it doesn’t support IRV for Saint Paul. Their reason: It's more complicated than "yes-no voting". The paper believes that "voting for one is ingrained in our DNA”. Read editorial.

This conclusion isn't what you might expect after reading the editorial, which provides a very user-friendly description of IRV, offers that Minneapolis voters should have no problems filling out their new IRV ballot next Tuesday and goes on to list a host of other benefits IRV brings to the electoral process:

 “The city's low-turnout primary has long been a concern. IRV supporters correctly point out that it brings out a small subset of the electorate - some would say the extremists — and can be subject to manipulation. IRV supporters also say IRV is more likely to produce winners with majorities. One of the strongest arguments for IRV, we think, is that it could give voters a way of taking a chance with an intriguing, independent candidate without fearing that the vote will help elect a candidate the voter strongly opposes. This "wasted vote" syndrome has long held back small-party and independent candidates.”

We  couldn’t have said it better ourselves! Yet then they conclude:

“[We] remain unconvinced of the compelling need to change the way we elect the mayor and members of the City Council. We view up-or-down, yes-no voting as simpler and clearer, and IRV as an intriguing idea whose time has not yet come in St. Paul.”

Write a Letter TODAY and tell Pioneer Press readers why the time HAS come for IRV in Saint Paul and why the editorial board should have advised voters to “Vote YES” for IRV November 3rd.  (You can also add your comments to the comments section) 

While you are still at the keyboard, tell readers why Saint Paul council members Dave Thune and Kathy Lantry should join their colleagues Melvin Carter and Russ Stark in opening Saint Paul elections to more choice and greater voter participation. See their anti-IRV piece.

Rep. Murphy, Council members Russ Stark and Carter, John Hottinger, Dave Durenberger, Ed Stringer, Dana Hendee, Kathleen Murphy all provide them with lots of reasons why they should be voting “YES” for IRV.

• Stringer, Hendee, Murphy: Vote 'yes' on IRV - Pioneer Pre

• Murphy, Stark, Carter: Vote 'yes' on IRV - Pioneer Press 

• Hottinger, Durenberger: IRV offers St. Paul a change to shift power away from special interest - MPR

Key talking points in response to the editorial:

1) Some people are trying to make IRV more confusing than it is. The information from other cities like San Francisco, Burlington, Aspen, etc. is that IRV is understood, liked, helps increase voter participation and saves money.

2) The 'false majority' idea is a diversionary argument being made by opponents. Just like two-step elections, IRV is designed to determine the winner supported by a majority of participating voters. IRV folds these two steps into one and accomplishes the ‘run-off’ in a single election in November, when turnout is highest and most diverse. More than 90 percent of voters in recent Burlington, Aspen and Pierce County elections participated in the final round of the IRV election, while 93 percent of St. Paul voters DID NOT participate in this year’s primary election. Very simply, IRV ensures winners are elected by MORE voters.

3) It is very disappointing that the Pioneer Press bought into opponents arguments that IRV could harm “disenfranchised” voters. Elected officials who represent those communities strongly support IRV and argue it does just the opposite. The first African-American President of the United States introduced IRV when he was in the Illinois legislature. A grassroots organizer himself, would he have done this if he believed it would have “disenfranchised” communities of color?

See Debunking IRV Myths for more information & talking points.

THANK YOU!  With just 5 days to go until Election Day, your voice is more important than ever. Please write and tell readers why you will be voting YES for IRV on Tuesday.

The St. Paul Better Ballot Campaign team