April 4, 2008

The Honorable David A. Gibson Secretary of the Senate State House 115 State St., Drawer 33 Montpelier, VT 05633

Dear Mr. Secretary:

Pursuant to Chapter II, Section 11 of the Vermont Constitution, I am returning S. 108, An Act Relating to the Election of U.S. Representative and U.S. Senator by the Instant Runoff Voting Method, without my signature because of objections described herein. There are serious flaws with this proposal to alter Vermont’s system of elections. This system has served the people of Vermont well for more than 200 years and is one I had the privilege of administering for a dozen years as Secretary of State. This bill circumvents the fundamental democratic principle of one person, one vote. That is entirely unacceptable. The authors of our Constitution applied this standard – compelling each voter to choose the candidate for each office that she or he deems most qualified – to ensure that elections are in fact a clear choice.

(Governor's website)

Follow up:

The Attorney General’s office has confirmed in a formal, written opinion that attempts to amend the law in order to apply the so called Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) process to races for Governor, Lieutenant Governor and Treasurer would, in fact, be unconstitutional. While S. 108 would apply to the election of our U.S. Representative and U.S. Senator, this does not render the attempt to legislatively impose IRV democratically sound.

Our state Constitution provides a clear and effective mechanism for changes to its provisions. Voter approval, through the process set forth in our Constitution for its amendment, necessitates a statewide ballot that includes the voices of all Vermonters. If the Legislature proposes to fundamentally alter our election process, this is the procedure Vermont should follow. The Honorable David A. Gibson April 4, 2008 Page Two

Moreover, voters should not be asked to cast their ballots based on a wide range of hypothetical, theoretical or imaginary outcomes. Elections have always been, and ought to remain, contests among individual candidates and their ideas. Voters have always, and should continue to, cast their constitutionally protected vote for the individual for each office they believe would best serve Vermont. In addition, the process offered by this bill cannot result in a candidate being the top choice of a majority of voters. It is mathematically impossible for the candidate chosen by the IRV process to receive a majority of first votes cast. In other words, use of an IRV system requires a significant number of second and third choices – not the voter’s real choice – to be counted. It is therefore not valid to conclude, as the advocates and special interests do, that the winner of an IRV election would receive a majority of the vote. Finally, this system would undoubtedly lead to backroom deal making between candidates who urge supporters to vote for or against a second choice candidate if no one receives a majority. This would erode public confidence in the process. This proposal would cause a deterioration of our time tested, democratic and egalitarian electoral process. The current system has served the people of Vermont well for more than 200 years. There is no basis to make the democratically unsound change this bill proposes.

Sincerely,

James H. Douglas Governor

JHD/jg