We won a major victory in Maine on June 12th in the effort to create a More Perfect Union and to Secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity by passing, at the ballot, for the second time in two years, a measure to enact Ranked Choice Voting/Instant Runoff Voting.

Democracy Chronicles Editor-in-Chief Adrian Tawfik asked me to write about my experiences helping to pass Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in Maine. Since he asked, and since this date may well be remembered (I have a dream) in the history of this nation as when the people of Maine helped take back our country for We the People, and since I am reminiscing over my journey to this post-Ranked Choice Voting Victory day, here is how volunteering to support Ranked Choice Voting started for me:

I met Diane Russell, recent gubernatorial candidate, Maine legend, and a leader and inspiration in the “Ranked Choice Voting Revolution” in Maine in person for the first time at Rocket Bar near 11th and H in Washington, D.C. on January 19, 2017. While she was unsuccessful in her bid to be Maine’s first women to serve as governor, she gets much credit for leading the charge to Ranked Choice Voting statewide in Maine.

I was working in D.C. at the time, and she was organizing the Resistance to the new administration, and putting together groups for the Women’s March, all while also apparently planning to run for governor.

It didn’t start there, we communicated by email for the first time Aug 22, 2011 at 4:59 p.m. We were put into contact through intermediaries, Dorothy Scheeline and Rob Richie, both with Fairvote, and Colleen Tucker, with the League of Women Voters of Maine.

Note that in this article, the submitted emails will also be my evidence should the sad day come when the tyranny of the Alt-Right drags me into kangaroo court accusing me of supporting the Gay/Abortion/George Soros/Marxist/Communist/Socialist/Liberal/Democrat/Leftist Conspiracy to bring Ranked Choice Voting to Maine. (Those are all things, by the way, I have been accused of during my defense of RCV these last couple of years, and especially in the two days prior to June 12th).

What a long strange trip it’s been.

Here, for the record, and since it was asked…

My RCV Origin Story

I met Diane Russell exactly because of her work on Ranked Choice Voting. But the story for me goes back much further.

I first became curious about alternate voting systems after experiencing the Bush-Clinton-Perot (and the later Dole-Clinton-Perot) election, and the accusations that Ross Perot had potentially cost both Bush (and Dole) the election, arguably not true, but RCV would have been better! (Fivethirtyeight did a good piece on that topic not too long ago.)

Then there was the infamous Lani Guinier nomination to be Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights which was ended in June 1993, when she was dropped by Clinton before having a chance to defend her views, which had been subject to a Republican smear campaign and taken out-of-context.

I later listened to Lani Guinier when she published her book, “Tyranny of the Majority: Fundamental Fairness in Representative Democracy“, who said in a CSPAN interview:

” …several columnists who had attacked me while my nomination was pending, is that in fact they were sympathetic to the underlying principle that I was relying on, and that is the principle of taking turns, that the majority should rule but the minority should be represented and should be respected in a way that allows both the majority to be accorded proportionate power or a fair share of power but not necessarily all of the power.”

Shame on Bill Clinton for not defending her, and buying into the smear of her academic work, he potentially set back the cause of improving our election systems literally 25 years almost to the day.

I had read Lani’s work, and was impressed with the thought process behind it, and was saddened that for a vicious and misinformed attack against her candidacy (frankly with racist undertones) that she was against “democracy” and she was never given the chance to defend herself in Senate hearings.

Then later in 1999, I became a U.S. History teacher and taught in middle school here in Maine. When Bush v. Gore (Nader) occurred, I was the school’s go to guy about our electoral system, and what was happening.

Fast forward a few years, where my thoughts on voting systems were interrupted:

…by 9/11
…a tour of duty with the U.S. Army in Iraq,
…heart surgery and recovery,
…working at Wolfe’s Neck Farm running an Education Program there….
…interrupted by another tour of duty with the Army in Iraq…

Coming back from Iraq in 2011, I was rekindling my interest in alternative voting systems and when Portland was deciding to use Ranked Choice Voting, I came across Fairvote’s website. I wanted to do what I could to participate, educate voters, and help this reform move along, which I believed could bring us back together as a nation.

I cold called Fairvote on Monday, August 15, 2011. I spoke to Dorothy, in Washington, D.C. She wrote this email:

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Dorothy Scheeline wrote:

Hi Rob,

Mitch called up looking for info about whether or not there is a statewide effort to get IRV on the ballot in Maine. His contact info is:

Mitch

Rob Richie wrote me back, put me in touch with Colleen Tucker at the League of Women Voters (I am very grateful for their leadership in this as well):

From: M Mitchell
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2011 1:03 PM
To: Colleen Tucker
Subject: Re: interest in starting/joining statewide IRV initiative

Hi Colleen,

I am interested in putting Instant Run Off voting on the ballot statewide.

I hear people are focused on Portland at the moment.

Do you know what plans there are for IRV statewide? I would like to participate.

Thanks,

Mitch

Colleen wrote back:

Colleen Tucker
To: M Mitchell
Cc: Diane Russell
Aug 22, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Hello, Mitch,

I know that State Rep. Diane Russell worked on state legislation to have the Governor of Maine elected by IRV, so am copying her on this email. Diane, can you plug him into any ongoing efforts for statewide IRV?

We would love to have you join the Maine League of Women Voters (we have alot of male members, nation-wide and a dozen or so in Maine) if you want to become involved in our efforts.

Or you could check in with our website now and then to see what we’re doing statewide on this and many other issues. www.lwvme.org

Colleen

Then this one, the first contact with the Legend, the Leader, Diane Russell:

From: Rep. Diane Russell 
To: Colleen, M Mitchell
Aug 22, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Hi Mitch,

Thank you for your interest in IRV/ranked voting in Maine. I’ve been working on this a number of years. At present, there is a focus on getting Portland right and we can use all the help we can get to that end. If we don’t do it right in Portland, there will be little if any stomach to do it statewide.

Placing something on the ballot requires serious resources (time and money), though I think if there was a funding source to get it on the ballot it could stand a relatively good chance of passing. That said, the Constitution of Maine requires the legislature be elected by the same means as the Governor so it would be a complete overhaul of our elections system.

In the meantime, I started a listserv to keep people in Maine in the loop about what’s going on statewide around ranked voting. Let me know if you’d like to be added to it; it’s the best way for me to keep likeminded individuals working on the issue until we can finally move statewide.

Cheers,

~Diane

Heat should not be a luxury item.

Rep. Diane Russell (Portland)

I wrote back:

From: M Mitchell
To: Diane and Colleen
Aug 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Dear Diane,

Yes, please add me to the listserv.

I am no lawyer, so I was hoping to be a part of a group that had people with the legal know-how to make it happen. I was aware it would require constitutional issues/changes though. Which I know makes it more complicated than other issues.

Thank you for your continuing efforts.

All the Best,

Mitch

Then this:

From: M Mitchell
To: Collen
Cc: Diane
Aug 23, 2011 at 6:39 AM (who deals with fixing democracy at 6:39 a.m.!!!)

Dear Colleen,

Thanks. I am working up in Augusta at the moment with a short assignment with the National Guard. I am a staff officer up there.

I returned from my second tour of duty in Iraq in January, and am looking to get involved with the “defense of democracy” on a different level. Something of my own choosing.

Have you seen this series of videos: They are from England, but very effective in explaining it. (Note-June 2018: I later learned CGP Grey is actually American-Irish)

I really think IRV needs to come from a citizen initiative in Maine, since it is hard to imagine a two party system voting against itself.

In Maine, with back to back minority governors from both parties, it should be an easier go of it than other places.

I envision a table with a sign on one side that says, if you weren’t happy with Baldacci (Note: Democrat) sign here (with his 38% win), and on the on the other, if you are unhappy with LePage (Note: Republican) sign here (with his 39% win).

Looking forward to working on this issue.

Sincerely,

Mitch

M D Mitchell

Freeport, ME

Colleen wrote back:

From: Colleen Tucker
To: M Mitchell
Cc: Rep. Diane Russell
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 7:06 AM (Note: June 2018: and the response in the wee morning as well! Dedicated people)
Subject: Re: interest in starting/joining statewide IRV initiative

Great video, Mitch; I’ll definitely be sharing this with our members and using it to educate voters!!

One thing this campaign needs most is good publicity, to get folks behind IRV and excited to use it. There are a lot of voices trying to convince the voters that it’s too complicated. So one of the ways you could help the MOST would be to write letters to the editor about why you’re supporting IRV and wishing we could elect our Governor with that method. We need to create enthusiasm among the voters AND the media. I’m sure there are a few journalists who would love to interview an Iraq war veteran about how you came to want to express your citizenry in this way. I know I’d like to hear it!

Thank you for your service and your enthusiasm. Nice to have you on our team. I’ll let you know when opportunities arise with this issue, but meanwhile, it would be great if you could write a letter to the editor and/or meet with the editorial board of the Portland Press Herald to tell them why you support this issue. They let citizens do that.

Have a great day.

Colleen Tucker

The next email:

From: M Mitchell
To: Colleen
Cc: Diane
Aug 23, 2011 at 5:11 PM

Hi Colleen,

I loathe to play the veteran “card” (although it did get me out of a traffic ticket once), but I think it is one of those, “put your money where your mouth” is kind of things. That I am willing to defend democracy lets me think I have a smidgen of a right to think about improving it too.

I have always appreciated that a serviceperson’s oath of office is to a piece of paper, and that piece of paper starts out “We the People…” It doesn’t mention parties. Too many voices of the people are shut out in the current system.

I am not a fan of extremists for example, but I think if they feel their voices are not heard, and have no outlet, that is when they turn to violence and other less than desirable tactics.

IRV, in my world view, would have the added benefit of showing political minorities that they are indeed just that, minority views, but still giving credence to their voice, and a party/candidate to belong too.

Right now, certain voices can believe they are larger than they are, but just hidden in the shadow of the larger parties. My personal politics lean left of center, but to the right on specific issues. I feel unrepresented by both parties in this, but understand that some of my views (I am for a service draft, and higher taxes for everyone (Note: Spread the burden fairly across society, It is the value of what we get for them, rather than how much we pay that I believe is most important!) are minority viewpoints.

My own IRV thought: “People before Parties.” (Parties have their place, they just come after the people.)

I liked the Massachusetts IRV group called Voter Choice Massachusetts, who had a great “Easy as 1-2-3” logo with the hands in the air showing fingers.

Does Maine IRV have a site like this? We really should if we don’t. I haven’t found one though, just the Fairvote.org site which brought me to you.

(As an aside, it drives me batty that Google doesn’t allow case sensitive searches, and I have to wade through Irv Goldberg, and Irv Kempner, and Irv Levy when I search for IRV, but I digress)

I haven’t written a letter to the editor in quite a while, I’ll mull that over, but I do contribute to the peanut gallery on the Press Herald when I am moved to do so in a pique of political impotence, my comments show up as “M” there. (Note: I am “Mitch” there now)

One issue I do have with IRV, and I haven’t read addressed yet is how to mark ballots where a voter has chosen not to assign a rank to the candidates. So if there are five candidates, and the voter chooses 1, 2 and 3, a blank on a paper ballot (or even a digital one) is open to abuse and voter fraud. Since stray marks cause ballots to be discarded it can’t go unaddressed, I wonder if a O and/or X. would indicate that a voter, under no circumstances wants their vote to count for a candidate. A slash \ or / could easily be argued was a poorly written 1 so I am not sure that would be good. It seems silly to have to think about it, but after living through the era of the “hanging chad” I think there is no issue that should go unconsidered in legislation on something like this.

All the Best,

Mitch

M D “Mend Democracy” Mitchell ;)

All was quiet for a little while. Then I read a Halsey Frank piece in the Forecaster, against Ranked Choice Voting —which by the way, I wish they would have stayed with calling it Instant Runoff Voting! It was a call to action. My first public writing in support of Ranked Choice Voting then was penned:

From: M Mitchell
Posted At: Thursday, October 27, 2011 11:24 AM
Posted To: Editor
Conversation: Rebuttal to Halsey Frank Piece in the Forecaster
Subject: Rebuttal to Halsey Frank Piece in the Forecaster

Dear Mr. Mehlsak,

I read Halsey Frank’s piece in the Forecaster and am compelled to respond.

I am one of the elusive “swing voters” that the press, politicians, and pollsters try to predict the behavior of year-after-year. I am a former U.S. History/Social Studies teacher (I still have my teaching license), and a two tour Operation Iraqi Freedom combat veteran (recently returned from my second tour earlier this year). I have spent a little of my life “supporting and defending” the Constitution, as well as educating people about our nation, its government, and its history.

I have no vested interest in the outcome of the race for Portland Mayor, as I am a Freeport resident, but I am a passionate supporter of improving our democracy, and I see Instant Run-Off Voting (called Ranked Choice in Portland) as one of the most important improvements in our political system in generations, and wish to see it on a statewide and national level.

Please consider my letter/opinion piece for a rebuttal to Mr. Frank’s piece. Let me know if you need it shorter or longer, I am happy to edit it for space as needed.

All the Best,

M D “Mitch” Mitchell

Freeport, ME

So I attached my first pro-RCV writing that I titled, “Ranked Choice: Democracy 2.0”. Here is it:

Portland, in choosing Ranked Choice, is taking a serious and important step to update our representative democracy. Halsey Frank, former chair of the Republican City Committee, in his recent Forecaster piece, questioned the abilities of Portland voters, saying Ranked Choice voting was too “difficult,” and claimed it was “absurd” that the voters could “meaningfully” chose from the current candidates. The people of Portland deserve more credit than this.

It is our role as voters to make the best choices we can, and put in the effort required to learn about them. Information about candidates is available through the press and from the candidates themselves. If a voter believes they do not know enough about a candidate to rank them, for whatever reason, there is no requirement for a voter to rank every candidate. A voter can choose to rank the top one, two, three or more and leave blanks for the others if they wish. This is still a vast improvement over the older method of voting.

Maine is the perfect example of why we need Ranked Choice voting, not only in Portland, but for the state and nation as well. In Maine’s last six gubernatorial elections, only one clear majority candidate was elected, Gov. King in 1998 with 58.6% of the vote. We have had back-to back minority governors from both sides of the political spectrum in the last two elections. Gov. Baldacci’s 38.1% win in 2006 and Gov. LePage’s 37.6% win in 2010 inspired legions of bumper stickers that claim, “I am part of the majority that DIDN’T vote for that guy.” Mainers deserve clear majority winners.

Ranked Choice solves some important problems that exist in the older method of voting. In Ranked Choice, there are no spoiler candidates. Voters can choose a candidate they truly agree most closely with, or one that supports a single issue they care passionately about, with no fear that the vote will cause a candidate they don’t agree with to be elected. If a voter wants to pick a Green Party candidate as a first choice, but prefers that a Democrat wins over a Republican if their first choice candidate is eliminated, the ballot allows the vote to show that preference. Also, if voter wants to pick a Tea-Party Candidate, but prefers a Republican over a Democrat, the vote can show that as well.

In Ranked Choice, there are no “thrown away” votes where a voter chooses someone with no chance of winning.

There are no “strategic” votes where a voter picks a candidate they don’t like, over a candidate they do like, because they fear another candidate they dislike more will get elected. The voters get to order the candidates as they prefer, or not choose them at all. It is as easy as 1, 2, 3–or more as needed up to the number of candidates.

Ranked choice allows a voter to pick a candidate for whatever reason they want, while still being able to vote their preference on other candidates. Maybe voters want to protest against the two traditional parties, or maybe their minority/fringe candidate represents an important single issue that they want to vote for. Whatever the reason, voters under Ranked Choice can make their vote a statement as they wish.

Ranked Choice also minimizes gaming the voting system. Parties can and do support fringe candidates they don’t agree with to run so that they draw votes away from their opposition. Rush Limbaugh spent years reviling Hillary Clinton, but then encouraged his listeners to vote for her in the 2008 election campaign. This type of “gaming the system” does not serve us well as a nation. In Ranked Choice voting, this becomes a dangerous strategy, since drawing out additional voters for an opposition “fringe” candidate, may have the unintended effect of supporting an opposition “mainstream” candidate as well.

Ranked Choice is not a perfect system, but the problems it has, it also shares with the older method of voting: it can’t prevent gerrymandering, it trends towards two parties over time, and it can’t guarantee a Condorcet winner (simply explained: a candidate who would beat every other candidate if they were run against each other in separate two person races). It does solve for the spoiler effect, allowing people to support smaller parties without sacrificing candidates they agree with, and produces a winner that a larger number of voters agree on.

We deserve more than a voting method that is reduced to one choice from two candidates. Our voting method should encourage a diversity of candidates from different backgrounds and beliefs to run for political office. Elections should be about choosing the best candidates, not locking us into limited choices. Ranked Choice allows voters the ability to have a more meaningful way of choosing from fields of candidates, while preserving a government where the will of the majority is represented.

After that, I ran afoul of that “liberal” media that is supposedly pushing for Ranked Choice Voting. Here is how that went:

From: Mo Mehlsak (editor, the Forecaster)
Subject: RE: Rebuttal to Halsey Frank Piece in the Forecaster
To: “M Mitchell”
Date: Thursday, October 27, 2011, 8:30 AM

Thanks for writing, but our length limit for letters is 250 words. Feel free to send a shorter version by noon Monday.

Mo Mehlsak
Editor | The Forecaster

WTF? The “bad guy” gets his say, but me? Bupkis. So begins my long history of getting almost nothing published in local papers. I was relegated to the comment section… sigh.

From: M Mitchell
Subject: RE: Rebuttal to Halsey Frank Piece in the Forecaster
To: “Mo Mehlsak”
Date: Thursday, October 27, 2011, 8:32 AM

Dear Mo,

I would like this to be a rebuttal opinion piece, not a letter.

I would note that Mr. Frank’s piece had 913 words, and mine has around 840.

Sincerely,
Mitch

Enter Diane Russell yet again…

From: M Mitchell
Subject: Fw: RE: Rebuttal to Halsey Frank Piece in the Forecaster against Ranked Choice Voting
To: “Colleen Tucker” & “Diane”
Date: Thursday, October 27, 2011, 8:34 AM

Dear Colleen and Diane,

Please help. See below.

Thanks,
Mitch

Diane and I then “colluded” for the first time:

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Rep. Diane Russell wrote:

Hi Rob and Dorothy (CC Colleen):

Can you see below? I don’t have time to shorten this to 250 words; Rob and Dorothy ~ can either of you help this gentleman out so we can get a rebuttal in ASAP?

Thank you!

Cheers,
~Diane

At this point, Dorothy Scheeline of Fairvote came back into the story:

To: Diane and Mitch
Cc: Rob Richie and Colleen
Oct 27, 2011 at 5:15 PM

I got it down to 232 words, I didn’t add anything just subtracted:

Portland, in choosing Ranked Choice, is taking a serious and important step to update our representative democracy. Halsey Frank, former chair of the Republican City Committee, in his recent Forecaster piece, questioned the abilities of Portland voters, saying Ranked Choice voting was too “difficult,” and claimed it was “absurd” that the voters could “meaningfully” chose from the current candidates. The people of Portland deserve more credit than this.

Maine is the perfect example of why we need Ranked Choice voting, not only in Portland, but for the state and nation as well. In Maine’s last six gubernatorial elections, only one clear majority candidate was elected, Gov. King in 1998 with 58.6% of the vote. We’ve had back-to back minority governors from both sides of the political spectrum in the last two elections. Gov. Baldacci’s 38.1% win in 2006 and Gov. LePage’s 37.6% win in 2010 inspired legions of bumper stickers that claim, “I am part of the majority that DIDN’T vote for that guy.” Mainers deserve clear majority winners.

Our voting method should encourage a diversity of candidates from different backgrounds and beliefs to run for political office. Elections should be about choosing the best candidates, not locking us into limited choices. Ranked Choice allows voters the ability to have a more meaningful way of choosing from fields of candidates, while preserving a government where the will of the majority is represented.

Dorothy

Then it was published, in 232 words, my first public efforts to support Ranked Choice Voting. I met Dorothy a few days later, when she was visiting Maine, I was doing voter education, and she was advocating for Ranked Choice Voting and working for Fairvote. This video of me advocating for Ranked Choice Voting, viewed a whopping 237 times to date, was shot spontaneously by Dorothy as we spoke to people by Congress Square in Portland Maine in November 2011:

What a long strange trip it has been.

I am still happily shocked that the people of Maine have now spoken via the ballot, twice, to insist that We the People are indeed in charge. Let’s hope our Representatives now represent us.

I’m now savoring the victory of the moment, even as there are many challenges ahead.