Pelota travels to Minnesota to push ranked choice voting

49
1363

Rep. Mary Peltola was in the Minnesota State Capitol on Friday, testifying on behalf of the Fair Vote Minnesota group to a House committee on how great ranked choice voting works in Alaska, and why Minnesota might consider adopting a similar plan.

Peltola told the House Elections Finance and Policy Committee that she credits ranked choice voting with her win in 2022. In fact, it was probably the reason she, a dark horse candidate, won against the most famous person Alaska has ever produced: Sarah Palin.

Minnesota’s HF 2486 would expand the number of Minnesota local governments that could adopt a ranked choice voting system for local elections and the bill would appropriate grants to them to aid its implementation. The bill is supported by Democrats but has no Republican co-sponsors.

“Ranked-choice voting rewards candidates that can build broad coalitions of voters and bring people together,” Peltola told the committee. “In our state, our ranked-choice system allowed me to run a positive campaign and focus on issues that voters care about. In order to win, I could not afford to alienate or ignore supporters of my opponents, as their second- and third-choice votes were critical in deciding who won. With ranked-choice voting, you have to be willing to listen to every voter. You have to at least consider opposing points of view. … I could not take any vote for granted, nor write any voter off.”

Peltola did not talk about the extraordinary delays that ranked choice voting creates in knowing the outcomes of elections, nor the extraordinary expense the state pays to educate voters about ranked choice voting, which is already the subject of a major recall via ballot initiative, now being sought through a petition from Alaskans for Honest Elections.

So far, only two states — Maine and Alaska — employ ranked choice voting for state and federal offices, except for the presidential election, which is governed federally.

Fair Vote Minnesota is similar to Alaskans for Better Elections. It’s funded by dark Outside money. Both groups get support from Unite America, a group dedicated to ranked choice voting and headed by progressive billionaire Kathryn Murdoch. Major funders that have backed both groups are John and Laura Arnold, political philanthropists who give millions to Democrat Party causes every year.

49 COMMENTS

  1. She is the perfect spokesperson for RCV. She can honestly say, “If it were not for RCV, I would never have won Don Young’s seat.”

  2. Of course she does. Look at what it got her.

    Probably unnecessary. MN is nearly a formal socialist state. A conservative has little chance to win.

    Can’t help but wonder if whoever pushes this will hire Porcaro’s firm to help them. It worked to sad perfection here.

    • Porcaro isn’t known in Minnesota, so maybe not. But I sure wish someone would ask him that question.

  3. She trying to validate her sneak-in win in Alaska. Sarah Palin forced us with this brainless idiot, then Sarah runs off and leaves us to deal Peltola.
    Palin is as bad as Peltola.

  4. RCV is a welcome change for the unanimous number of voters in the state of Alaska: The Undeclared Voter. We want a choice and not to be strong armed into goose stepping to the furors call.

    • You choose not to be in a party. Ok, it’s your choice. If you are not happy with the choices after a primary then get better candidates to run. Under our primary system, primaries are only for party candidates. A candidate that is independent does not get eliminated in a primary election, they advance to the general election. So, explain how RCV expanded your choices in any way.

      • Why should a political party choose the candidates at all?

        When both political parties go to the extremists, it leaves the largest bloc of voter in this state out to twist in the wind.

        Many voters choose who they vote for exclusively by political party and not the candidate’s positions. RCV encourages people to vet their candidates themselves and gives less power to the Republican and Democrat Parties.

        RCV encourages more informed voters. RCV also opened up a primary election where we get to choose the top 4 people regardless of party and it gives you a diverse group to choose from.

        So please tell me how this is bad?

      • “So, explain how RCV expanded your choices in any way.”

        RCV did expand choices, but the use of a system without party primaries also expanded choices.

        Primaries are very convoluted and dysfunctional, indeed limit choices for voters, and sometimes elect a less-preferred candidate. More than 85% of elections are decided by one primary or the other, not the general election. An independent or unaffiliated voter in a closed primary system is not able to participate in a crucial stage of the election process. Even in states with open primaries, a voter that asks for an R primary ballot is losing the ability to determine some of the elected officials on the other Democratic primary ballot.

        Independents and third party candidates face severely prohibitive ballot access hurdles that also limit choices for voters. Losers of primaries are blocked by sore loser laws from accessing the general election ballot as independents or third party candidates. Forcing Lisa to run as a write-in candidate in 2010 is a very pertinent example.

    • And, by the way, the term is ‘Fuehrer’ or ‘Fuhrer’. If you’re going to call someone a nazi, get the terminology right.

    • The undeclared voter in Alaska always had a voice, ranked choice voting gave that voice a megaphone and it became louder than the voice of the majority. Mary Peltola was the first choice of 39.7 percent of Alaskans. Ranked choice voting rewards the loser, plain and simple. She is a big proponent of ranked choice voting because she knows wouldn’t be in office without it. Just for fun, look up the 2022 NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year voting.

  5. What she says will matter very little. Just like happened here, it is who actually counts those votes that matters. And it is not the people who think they are…

  6. Hopefully they’ll look at her track record and be scared off. RankCV is just another layer used to hide fraud. Only machines can count the rankC vote. If lisa could win without rankCV we wouldn’t have it in this state.

  7. No shame. No dignity or scruples. Classic left leaning ‘end justifies the means’, irregardless of ethics. What’s a little bit of rigged election if it gets you what you want?

  8. I like the open primary. It allows for any legal Alaskan to run to represent the state not just the politically connected or the rich or the pretty. The idea peddled by Kelly that each Alaskan needs to be vetted by a party is authoritarian and the opposite of Freedom and Liberty. Frankly I don’t think anyone on here or elsewhere truly believes “Seperate but Equal” paradigm.

    • You’ve always had a choice to run as an independent candidate. Primaries are only to find a winner for each party. Non party candidates simply advanced to the general election. Your above statement is completely false.

      • If party primaries only nominated a candidate for a party, no one like Scott Kendall would be trying to abolish them. Losers of primaries were not able to advance to the general election under the old system as independents or third party candidates, and ballot access rules for independents and third party candidates limit their ability to do so. In essence, parties had government-granted special power and privilege to dictate ballot access for a public election. More than 85% of elections are decided in one of the two major party primaries. It seems that Chris’ statement is essentially correct.

  9. Last week I signed the petition to repeal RCV. Getting idiots like MP out of office was the reason why.

    • Where are these folks?

      I have not seen a single person around Anchorage with the petition.

      Please share so we can sign

  10. Who paid for her to fly to Minnesota and spend time there? No one seems to know but we must find out. Follow the money!!

  11. The Democrats are flush with money thanks to Biden’s Inflation Expansion Act. Peltola will go to DC once in awhile, but she’ll mainly be paraded around like a trophy for the DNC to win the Native American vote.

  12. One man; one vote is the US Constitution standard; not one man three votes, possibly etc. If the Constitution matters to anyone. Who has authority to override the US Constitution?

  13. What is our representative doing in Minnesota??? Why was Kathryn Murdoch so concerned about a referendum in Alaska??…….

  14. I can’t decide if I find it laughable or maddening that Mary Peltola was chosen to be a witness for RCV. There are many other people who could have been chosen, but Mary is the worst elected official in the country to be selling RCV to anyone. She is the poster child for RCV failure! Nick Begich was the most preferred candidate in that special election, but it suffered from a rare spoiler scenario and elected her. Almost no one seems to be aware of this failure or understand it, or if they are, they are strangely silent about it, and I find this exasperating.

      • According to all of the ballot information provided by voter rankings, Nick Begich was incontrovertibly the most preferred candidate in that special election, so RCV did NOT work perfectly. I would assume your real point is that RCV was implemented to give Democrats or progressives an advantage, but it certainly did not do that and cannot do that. RCV certainly has its flaws, but favoring one ideology or party over another is not one of them. When it fails, it could just as well harm Democrats; it’s an equal opportunity offender.

        Almost no one seems to be aware of this particular RCV failure, or they don’t understand it. For those who are aware of it, they are strangely silent about it. Many who really dislike RCV and are trying to prevent it from being implemented in Alaska and other places around the country will cite many reasons to reject it, and many of those reasons are not even mathematically accurate or correct. This particular RCV failure legitimately highlights a major flaw for this voting method. It is a wonderful gift for people like Kelly, Sarah, Mike Shower, Hans von Spakovsky (Heritage Foundation), Trent England (Stop RCV at FB), and the Alaska organizations trying to repeal it, yet they never point to it.

  15. She is actually a good choice for selling RCV. Heck, I could write her speech for her.
    “So I am here to tell you how wonderful RCV is. In Alaska, we had 60% republican 40% democrat voter turnout, and I, A democrat, won. No way I would have won in a real election, but RCV turned the tide and canceled out the popular vote. it worked just as it was intended.”

    • From a political science standpoint, your concern about the 40/60% issue is misguided or misplaced. Your statement that “we had 60% republican 40% democrat voter turnout” makes an assumption about the voters that is false. More than 60% of registered voters in Alaska do not identify or register with either the D or R party. Many, likely most, of these voters do not see or pay attention to the party affiliation of the candidates. They vote for person, not party. Thus it is perfectly plausible for the single D candidate in the race with about 40% of first-place votes to be the most preferred candidate. She was not the most preferred in this case, but such a candidate could be in an Alaska election.

  16. Peltola in Minnesota representing Alaska? Folks in Crooked Creek or Karluk need her there? Economy or First Class seats? Eh?

  17. Since RCV got ‘red state’ Alaska a liberal (lying) congressperson; perhaps this would help the GOP in Minn. where liberals have a lock on the state. Maybe, w/ rank choice, the socialists vote will be split, opening the door for a normal candidate to win. I can not figure out why blue state Minn. would want this, the libs already own the place.

  18. Democrats love RCV because it gives them another tool to win against conservatives. They are the deep staters who meet in dark Smokey boiler rooms to plan and coordinate (and they hold people internally accountable with fear of public smears and cancellation). Did anyone notice that the Democrats made sure that Peltola was the only choice for non-conservatives and Palin-haters? Remember how Dr. Al “bear killer” Gross bowed out in June with little explanation? I guess I can’t explain why Chesbro didn’t get out of the race for the Senator, except that a Democrat strategist might have said, “we just need to have a very weak candidate to maintain some shred of integrity.”

Comments are closed.