Letters
November 2005

Voting systems: advantages and disadvantages

Rob Richie recently wrote an opinion article in this newspaper advocating replacing the usual "plurality" voting system in Takoma Park, by "Instant Runoff Voting" (IRV). Richie is the founder of the Center for Voting and Democracy (CVD), a group advocating IRV. Although we believe IRV has advantages over plurality, considerably greater advantages can be achieved with greater simplicity and less cost by using a different system: range voting. We would both like to see Range implemented in a city such as Takoma Park, and for Richie instead advocate it.

• Plurality: your vote is the name of a single candidate. The most-named candidate wins.
• RV: your vote is a preference-ordering of the candidates, such as "Amy>Bob>Cal>Dee." The candidate top-ranked by the fewest voters is eliminated from the election and from all votes. (I.e. if Bob were eliminated, then this vote would become "Amy>Cal>Dee"; if Amy were eliminated it would become "Bob>Cal>Dee.") Then we do another round using the modified votes and reduced candidate set--and so on round by round, until only a single candidate remains.
• Range: your vote is a score for each candidate in some fixed numerical range, for example 0-9. For example, you could vote Amy=9, Bob=9, Cal=4, Dee=0. We also recommend permitting voters to express "no opinion" about candidates by instead writing an X (intentional blank), e.g. Cal=X. The candidate with the highest average score wins. There are many reasons why range voting is superior.
• Expressivity: You can express not only who you prefer to whom, but also by how much. You can also rank candidates as equal. You can also express ignorance about a candidate ("X") to leave the scoring about them to other, hopefully better-informed voters. Or, you can give them 0. With plurality, you are forced to give the minimum possible amount of information in your vote, making it the worst possible voting system in this respect--while Range is more like the best possible.
• Voting Machines: Range voting can be handled by any voting machine in the United States right now, with no modification required, because it can actually be treated as several artificial plurality-style elections. IRV cannot.
• Spoiled ballots: With Plurality, an accidental "overvote" invalidates your ballot and it is discarded. With IRV, there are many more ways to spoil your ballot, for example by accidentally ranking two candidates the same. But with Range, every way to award candidates a single-digit score is legal, and there is no such thing as an overvote. And even if you do make an illegible score, it can be treated as an "X" in which case most of your vote still remains operational and undiscarded.
• Tie-crises: With IRV, every single round gives an opportunity for a tie or near-tie, Florida-style crisis, increasing the likelihood of crises and major delays. With Range, in contrast, the chance of a tie is reduced, versus either Plurality or (especially) IRV.
• Better results: Our computer simulation studies indicate range voting yields higher-quality winners, on average, than any other common voting system proposal, across a very wide variety of scenarios.
• Simplicity & Familiarity: Who has not been asked to rate things on a scale of 1 to 10? Everybody is familiar with the system and has seen it on TV (the Olympics).
• Nader: Richie went on at great length about how IRV solves the "Nader stigma" problem where voters who prefer Nader over Gore over Bush, by voting Nader, sadly cause both Nader and Gore to lose. (Similarly, Buchanan votes caused Bush to lose some states to Gore.) Voters therefore are motivated to "dishonestly" vote Gore, thus hurting Nader far more than he deserves and artificially perpetuating the United States' two-party domination stranglehold. But Richie's claim is only true sometimes: it is still possible in IRV that your vote Nader>Gore>Bush will cause both Nader & Gore to lose, whereas voting Gore>Nader>Bush would cause Gore to win. (Two example elections of that kind are on the CRV web site.) So you can still be motivated to vote dishonestly.
• Clones: Finally, both IRV and Range totally solve the "cloning" problem where introducing a "clone" of some candidate into the race, causes them both to lose, even though either running alone would have won. With IRV or Range, candidates neither gain advantage nor lose it when clones enter (aside from the victory moving between the clones).

To find out more about range voting, check the Center for Range Voting web site: math.temple.edu/~wds/crv/RangeVoting.html.

-- Warren D. Smith
Stony Brook, New York

Politics a contact sport?

I lived here longer than any other place. And I was here when politics in Takoma Park was considered a contact sport. Nevertheless, what I witnessed recently was new. During public comments at the October 17th City Council meeting, Keith Berner ranted against Seth Grimes, who is challenging the incumbent mayor. He did not contrast the candidates' views or values; instead he slurred Grimes by association -- a tactic perfected by a long-discredited United States Senator. Berner "accused" Grimes of associating with "right wingers". Perhaps this is an accurate observation, but hardly grounds to discredit Grimes' candidacy.

Sammie Abbott, as left-winger a mayor as Takoma Park ever had and probably ever will have, frequently and proudly noted that his candidacy for mayor was supported by Takoma Park voters of all political stripes, explicitly acknowledging that even"right wingers" from the John Birch Society were supporting him. His was a principled declaration based on the fact that his unflinching advocacy for our community was respected by Democrats, Republicans, leftists, and rightists. It did not mean that he shared Birch Society politics on national and international issues. I and anyone else who knew Sam can assure you he did not.

I am not suggesting that the challenger is the candidate for whom I will vote -- that is a decision I have not yet made. I am only suggesting that Berner not only failed to contribute to the political dialogue, but unnecessarily introduced a mean-spirited partisanship into the race. One might hope, even expect, the incumbent mayor to distance herself from Berner's remarks, but when he finished Mayor Kathy Porter responded by thanking him. Should we now thank the mayor for allowing the publicly aired council meetings to become a forum for mean spirited attacks? If so, will she thank those who, like Berner, rant and rave against her, not because of her policies or political judgment, but for the company she keeps? Or having drawn first blood, will she declare council meetings an attack free zone?

At the October 24th meeting Berner's second and trivial attack about Grimes'signs was met with objection by Nelly Moxley. Porter silenced Moxley declaring that council meetings are a forum for everyone. I hope Grimes and his supporters do not view this as an invitation to villify her. And I still hope Kathy Porter, the mayor, will take the higher road, and disassociate herself from Berner's remarks. So far, Kathy Porter, the candidate has not.

-- Tom Gagliardo
Takoma Park, Md.

The human cost of "sensible growth"

As a resident who lives across the creek from Washington Adventist Hospital and placed a Sensible Growth sign in our yard, I am sadden to hear WAH is choosing to leave. While I wanted to control the racing traffic in my neighborhood, which I presumed would only grow with the hospital services, I forgot about the people.

My neighbor who has visited the ER on more than one occasion for his cardiac care needs. My friend who is living with cancer and feels safer knowing she can get emergency care right in the community. While I support the goals of sensible growth, I had to take the sign down after considering their needs.

Faced with changes in our community, why not work with WAH and community to develop a new resident that would offer health care as an ambulatory care center or a holistic healing center that offers alternative therapies and care giving on an unprecedented scale.

It's time we all started thinking about sensible solutions to our community's comprehensive health needs.

-- George Neighbors
Silver Spring, Md.

Politicians are doing little to preserve affordable housing

Mike Tabor's column in the October Voice about the possible displacement of tenants in our community led me to contact a tenant in the building mentioned in the column. I was invited to one of their meetings, and what I saw was a besieged group of tenants, some of whom have lived in the building on Houston Avenue for 10 and 15 years.

They are being pressured by the landlord to move so he can "flip" the building and make a financial killing in Montgomery County's soaring real estate market. (This is a problem now facing affordable apartment buildings throughout the county.)The tenants do not have the resources to buy the building or their units, so their only hope lies in legal and legislative measures and public pressure.

The tenants have a real fight to avoid being thrown out of their homes. I was encouraged to see that the tenants' group was receiving help from our stalwart local City Councilmember Marc Elrich and attorney Jamin Raskin, but it was extremely discouraging to hear that they had gotten no response when they contacted the offices of other local political representatives, namely Ida Ruben, Sheila Hixson, Peter Franchot, and Gareth Murray. The help of these state legislators is critical because the Maryland government needs to pass legislation allowing local governments to enact laws to protect tenants in these condo-conversion situations.

Despite the promises of some county and state legislators to build affordable housing in the future, their action on condo conversions right now may determine the fate of many tenants who live in existing affordable apartments. It is an issue on which political representatives will have to stand up to landlords and their financial contributions.

I urge Voice readers to contact their state representatives and members of the Montgomery County Council (including Steve Silverman, Chair of the Planning, Housing, and Economic Development Committee) and ask them to help moderate and low income tenants in our county. For more information on the Houston Avenue apartment situation and how you can help, contact Pat Powell, who lives in the building, at 301-608-0073.

-- Wally Malakoff
Takoma Park, Md.

Are we waiting for someone to get killed?

Once again, I have witnessed a traffic accident in front of my apartment, on the corner of 16th St. and East-West Highway in Silver Spring. Someone rushing to make a left hand turn before the light turns red, as they are encouraged to do by the lack of a "left turn on arrow only" requirement, gets clipped by someone they didn't see coming in the opposite lane, who veers into the (fortunately empty) crosswalk to try to avoid them.   In one year, I have seen this happen more than once, and have also encountered:

·   Drivers taking right turns too fast and going off the road, onto the sidewalk or traffic island;

·   Drivers attempting to pass other drivers and going off the road and onto the sidewalk;

·   Drivers taking left turns without the arrow and nearly hitting people walking on the crosswalk (during the brief sixteen-second interval which pedestrians are permitted to cross the six lanes of traffic);

·   Drivers swearing at pedestrians for presuming to cross on the "walk" signal and interfering with their attempts to make no-stop left and right turns.

The city of Silver Spring seems to be in denial about this, but East-West highway at this location is a residential street and a major pedestrian thoroughfare to downtown Silver Spring and the Metro.  

Perhaps they are waiting for someone to get killed and bring proper attention to this before they decide to start enforcing the speed limits and reckless driving laws, make left turns "arrow-only" and require full stops before right turns, as well as perhaps giving pedestrians a reasonable amount of time to cross the street .  

As someone who frequently uses the sidewalks and crosswalks with a child, I am not prepared to wait for a martyr to poor public planning and traffic policing before demanding that someone do their job.   Lawsuits are a poor substitute to proper preventive action.

-- David Tarr
Silver Spring, Md.

Is Montgomery County really prepared for an emergency?

With the recent images of hurricanes, widespread flooding, and the broad swath of destruction and human misery that spreads from Florida to Texas, we must ask ourselves whether our own public officials in Montgomery County are prepared to protect us.   Can Montgomery County officials respond quickly and effectively to a natural disaster or terrorist attack in our own backyard?   The alarming failures of FEMA and the state and local authorities in Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas following Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma suggest a less disaster prone jurisdiction like Montgomery County may even be less prepared to respond.

It is imperative that we carefully examine our own emergency preparedness procedures in Montgomery County to be assured that, in the event of a disaster, either natural or man-made, that our County officials have a viable strategy and the necessary resources to protect and care for our neighbors throughout the County.

Notwithstanding the much-acclaimed creation of the Montgomery County's Department of Homeland Security last year, there is little public evidence that the County has a plan to communicate to communities and residents in the event of a disaster.   Because there will likely to be a period of time in any future disaster before the Government will be able to respond and to communicate to neighborhoods regarding emergency responses, the community-at-large must be informed and made a partner in official emergency preparedness planning, strategies and responses.   We need to know what we should to protect ourselves and our families before an emergency happens and how to help the public authorities do their work.   We need to know how the County will communicate and provide aid to, among others, senior citizens, disabled persons, the poor, and neighbors who do not speak English as their primary language.

September 2005 was National Preparedness Month, yet Montgomery County officials seemed to be strangely absent from a targeted regional campaign funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to increase public awareness about the importance of preparing for emergencies and to encourage individuals to take action.   There were no visible public statements by County officials, few targeted community meetings, and no mailings to residents highlighting possible threats, and recommending actions in the event of an emergency.   The County's nearly invisible "Alert Montgomery" program and its recently-released seven minute Internet video are poor substitutes for an aggressive public information campaign.

The horrible images from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina do not give any comfort about the federal government's ability to respond quickly and effectively in a natural disaster.   We've spent billions of dollars post 9-11 to develop a national strategy to respond to emergencies.   This strategy appears to be badly flawed.   Montgomery County officials need to publicly assure us that they're on top of the problem.   And they need to better inform the community about what to do in the case of a disaster.

-- Alan S. Bowser
-- Eric Hensal
The writers are members of the Silver Spring Citizens Advisory Board