To the editor:
I was concerned by the Oct. 8 article “Voting changes backed by out-of-staters” because it misrepresents the support for ranked choice voting, and the nature of it.
First, ranked choice voting is not radical or confusing. If you’ve ever ordered pizza with a group of friends, and said “My favorite is mushroom, but I’d also be happy with pepperoni,” then you understand ranked choice voting. Ranked choice lets you vote for the candidate you most want elected, and also indicate who else you would be happy to support if your first choice can’t win. The goal is consensus — electing the candidate most of us will be happy with, rather than getting stuck with a candidate who is the first choice of a minority of voters because other candidates with similar views “split the vote.”
Second, the article raises concerns about the legality and logistics of ranked choice voting. However, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey has deemed the proposed law constitutional, and supports it, describing it as a way to “strengthen our democracy.” As for logistics, Secretary of State William Galvin will be responsible for implementing the change, and he also supports it.
I do agree that money in politics is a huge problem. But business as usual won’t address it. Both Massachusetts senators, six of our nine representatives, and two former governors agree that it’s time to give voters, not donors, more power at the ballot box through ranked choice voting. Please join us in voting yes on 2.