First: Congratulations to the Chicago Board of Elections, which ran a crisply efficient operation Tuesday, with few problems in the precincts during the day and a stunningly quick vote count at night.
Second: We like this runoff system.
Chicago has had a runoff system to elect the mayor since 1999, not that anyone could tell. This was the first election in which it was truly put to the test.
Every candidate knew the rules. If one candidate got 50 percent plus one vote, that candidate was elected. If nobody got 50 percent, the top two vote-getters would keep campaigning, winner takes all on April 5.
Advantage: Chicago. If Rahm Emanuel had not demonstrated ample support across the city, he would not have been elected Tuesday. He would have been in a race today with the second-place candidate.
Let’s start talking about whether Illinois should adopt this.
A year ago, nearly 80 percent of Republican primary voters voted for somebody other than Bill Brady to be their candidate in the general election. Brady’s support was astoundingly poor in the six-county Chicago area. His best showing: 8.5 percent of the vote in McHenry County. He got less than 6 percent in Cook, DuPage and Lake.
Statewide, Brady won just 20.26 percent of the vote — but it was enough in a crowded field to be the nominee.
What if there had been a runoff between the top two vote-getters in that primary: Brady and Kirk Dillard, who trailed Brady by just 193 votes?.
You would not have had a 20 percent candidate in the general election. You would have had a candidate who was the choice of a majority of Republican voters.
Take note: There also would have been a runoff in the general election. Gov. Pat Quinn’s 46.79 percent on Nov. 2 wouldn’t have gotten it done.
The drawback to adding a round of balloting is the cost. It’s expensive to run a state election. But what if Illinois fully adopted the Chicago system: Everybody runs without party labels on the first ballot, and there’s a runoff if necessary. That would be two trips to the polls, same as now. Both elections could be held in the fall, so we wouldn’t have the ridiculous nine-month gap between the primary and general elections.
Just a thought.
