If there are two principles that define democracy, they are one man, one vote and majority rule.

The first one is working in Maine, although “person” instead of “man” is now more accurate and politically correct.

But, in six of the past seven elections, we have sent governors to the Blaine House with less than majority mandates to lead.

Last week, Republican Paul LePage became the state’s next governor with 38 percent of the vote, narrowly nudging out independent Eliot Cutler, who got 37 percent.

Having been on the losing end of a tight race, Cutler now is calling upon the state to adopt a new variation of voting that is guaranteed to produce at least the appearance of majority support.

It is widely thought that Cutler would have won under a system that allowed voters to rank their choices for governor.

Cutler’s campaign was based upon appealing to the middle of the political spectrum, the wide band of voters who were weary of Democratic control, but not quite ready for the tea party leanings of LePage.

Cutler was nearly successful. During the final days of the campaign, voters began to swing from the more liberal Mitchell to the more conservative Cutler.

Had they been able to rank their votes, the 19 percent of voters who cast ballots for Mitchell likely would have listed Cutler as their second choice.

A few reluctant LePage supporters — those simply determined to keep Mitchell out of the governor’s office — might also have listed Cutler as their second choice.

Under the ranked-choice system, the candidates with the fewest votes are eliminated and their second choice becomes a vote for another person. This is done in rounds until one candidate finally wins a majority.

Opponents complain that this would dilute the votes of people who feel strongly for their candidates, delivering a lukewarm vote to an undeserving candidate.

Supporters say it might cut down on negative advertising, since candidates might need the votes of their opponents’ supporters to win.

On the other hand, the system would clearly favor centrist candidates and would hurt any candidate strongly on the left or right wing of the political spectrum.

Is that good? Perhaps. But it also would become much harder for a new governor to move the state in a bold, new direction, as LePage has promised to do.

The ranked-choice system is an interesting alternative that stands virtually no chance of approval in a Legislature dominated by the two traditional parties. Republicans, in particular, having won control of the governorship and Legislature, are guaranteed to oppose this idea.

Only a citizen-initiated referendum could move this idea forward, and that would take either money or a true groundswell of public support, neither of which seems likely.

Who would lead such an effort? Cutler would look like a sore loser trying to set himself up for the next race.

So, with no leader, no money and no groundswell … well, you get the picture.

Ranked choice may be a good idea, but expect our winner-take-all, minority-rule system — with all its warts — to be around for a long time to come.

editorialboard@sunjournal.com

Copy the Story Link