The Spokane woman. [volume] (Spokane, Wash.) 1921-1935, 1928-03-08

The new system of election proposed
by the city council provides for no
nominating primary. wherein these
shall be selected two candidates for
each office to he filled who shall then
compete in n final election A mere
plurality will elect in most cases. a
majority is not required: and in most
eases the result will be that cohesive
minority will elect. Frequently can
didates are chosen because of their
outstanding individual qualities. but
Spokane political history has shown
tnat candidates may be elected he
cause such candidates represent the
wishes or non-law-enfOrcing ideals of
ii cohesive minority, while in the same
election the outstanding personal quail
tiles and character of the numerous
other candidates will cause that scat
tering of votes which spells defeat to
so many good causes represented by
too many candidates.
The municipal election plans of all
important cities involve some mode of
nomination followed by ''run-off''
final election. Only in small communi-
ties is the proposed scheme used. The
preferential system has all the advan-
mating and the second electing; and
at the same time the preferential sys-
TEN possesses the element of economy
in accomplishing nomination and cleo
ton at Il single election. The elector
may do under the preferential system
on one day and by one voting precisely
what is accomplished in Seattle by
two elections and any elector who
mt al in
Seattle to vote in the nominating pri-
mary and thereafter to vote in the final
election, will be able To muster suffi-
cient intelligence in Spokane To accom-
plish the same result at one election
and at one voting under the preferen-
tal system. Before the adoption Of
the preferential system the charter
campaign committee tested out the
preferential system by hundreds of test
votes at school meetings. church meet
ings and lodge meetings: and i'm these
elections where individuals of every
age and sex and condition of life were
permitted TO vote. the number of er-
rors were negligible. In fact, nine
tenths of the errors occurring in the
voting of the preferential system have
been intentional, and the number of
erroneous ballots has not been greater
under the preferential system than UNI
der the former system.
The opponents of the preferential
system present tumble of arguments
about the alleged confusion to an elec-
tor voting the second choice in his pref
erential ballot But this argument is
specious, for the only possible argu-
ment as to the method of second choice
voting is a legal argument, altogether
removed from the mind of any electOr
in the voting booth. Assuming two
offices to be filled, the instructions.
which are printed upon the ballot.
will be as follows-first, as to first
choice voting the instructions will
Iead-"Vote first choice for two can
ddates or ballot will be void. Sec
md and third choice is not compul-
sorry" This clearly informs any cleo
Tor whose intelligence is worthwhile
preserving i'm the result of an cleo
lion, that it is mandatory upon him
To vote two first choices or his en-
tire ballot will be void, and he will
likewise be advised that it is not
necessary for him to vote either see
ond or third choice votes.
A second situation arises when.
there being two offices only to be
filled. an elector votes for three
candidates in his first choice or for
,Ir,n candidates in his second