BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
METHOD:PUBLISH
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
PRODID:-//WordPress - MECv7.33.0//EN
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://lwvofpwm.org/
X-WR-CALNAME:League of Women Voters Port Washington-Manhasset
X-WR-CALDESC:Empowering Voters. Defending Democracy
X-WR-TIMEZONE:America/New_York
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/New_York
X-LIC-LOCATION:America/New_York
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20260308T030000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=03;BYDAY=2SU
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20261101T010000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=11;BYDAY=1SU
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
X-MS-OLK-FORCEINSPECTOROPEN:TRUE
BEGIN:VEVENT
CLASS:PUBLIC
UID:MEC-1bcef5d8bd566084523bf65b7e1a245d@lwvofpwm.org
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20220426T190000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20220426T203000
DTSTAMP:20220417T212756Z
CREATED:20220417
LAST-MODIFIED:20220423
PRIORITY:5
SEQUENCE:0
TRANSP:OPAQUE
SUMMARY:LWV of PWM Concurrence Meeting with NYC on Ranked Choice Voting
DESCRIPTION:All members are encouraged to participate:\nRegistration\nWhat is concurrence and why participate?\nConcurrence is a process through which Leagues can adopt a new position without doing their own study because another (trusted) League has done the study.\nIn this case, NYC has studied the issue and our Electoral Reform Committee is asking PWM to adopt NYC’s position by concurrence.\nIf the consensus of the LWV of PWM members is to concur, our League will be adopting the NYC position\nA year ago, our LWV of PWM adopted the 2020 US Electoral Systems position by concurrence. The US position articulates principles for selecting voting systems, all of which the NYS position on RCV aligns with.\nWhat is the LWV of NYC position on Ranked Choice Voting?\nHere is the proposed position:\n\n\n\n\n\nWe support ranked-choice voting (sometimes called “instant runoff voting”) in all local elections, including primaries, specials, and general elections.\nVoters should have the option to rank at least three and at most six candidates for a given office.\nThe counting should cease to reallocate votes once a candidate receives over 50% of the current round’s vote.\nRCV/IRV should happen in lieu of any head-to-head runoffs that might otherwise have occurred.\nAdequate funding should be provided for training, equipment, staff, and voter education.\n\n\n\n\n\nHere are  the questions our League will discuss to reach consensus (agree/disagree):\n “Which system offers more benefit to voters, communities, candidates — the current system or RCV — when multiple candidates vie for one seat in regards to:\n\n\n\n\n\nBeing aligned with the current LWV of PWM and LWV of US positions on Electoral Systems\nGiving their ballot the most influence over who will represent them?\nEncouraging campaigns to focus on issues rather than personality/mudslinging?\nEnsuring that representative bodies better reflect their communities?\nEncouraging voters to learn more about all candidates and their positions, rather than just considering a single party affiliation or a single issue pro/con?\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLWVNYC’s reasoning\n\n\n\nVoters in other cities and states that use RCV appear to understand and like the system, and cities like Santa Fe reported increased voter confidence in the quality of the result. Voters are also able to express their preferences more fully than they would with the existing system.\nObservers in other cities with RCV report reduced negative campaigning.\nWhile we strongly recommend ample funding for logistical and educational needs, RCV has been run in Maine on a shoestring budget, so it is cost effective, particularly in comparison to the 2009 and 2013 Public Advocate regular runoffs, which cost $13 million with single-digit voter turnout.\nThere is no clear effect on voter turnout, suggesting the lack of a negative consequence on that front.\nThere is modest evidence for RCV leading to an increase in elected officials that are female or people of color.\n\n\n\nLWVNYC’s Listing of Benefits from Ranked Choice Voting\n\n\n\nRCV gives you more say in who gets elected. Even if your top-choice candidate does not win, you can still help choose who does. Your preferences are reflected in the outcome.\nRCV may lead to more diverse and representative elected officials.There is some evidence of this in cities using RCV.\nEliminates the need for runoff elections\nRCV arguably promotes more civility and less negative campaigning. Candidates who are not your top choice still need your support as your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th choice, giving them an incentive to appeal to a wider audience.\nRCV may reduce polarization of the electorate by removing the current advantages some campaigns derive from tacking to the extreme\n\n\n\nRead the Position & Study materials ( https://lwvofpwm.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/LWVNYC-RCV-Educ-Packet-FINAL.pdf ) \nWatch a recent discussion by LWV Advocates from CA, FL, IL, WA, DC, NYC  for Election Reform  Video on RCV sponsored by LWV Rogue Valley (OR) and LWV Sacramento (CA)\nRead about our LWV of PWM Advocacy Committee on Electoral Reform ( https://lwvofpwm.org/voting-reform-electoral-systems/ ) (and RCV)\n \n
URL:https://lwvofpwm.org/calendar/lwv-of-pwm-concurrence-443/
CATEGORIES:Concurrence,Educational Events,Electoral Reform Meetings
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR