So who really won, anyway?

Frontiersman editorial board

Recent discussion in the Mat-Su Borough Assembly determined that borough mayoral candidates will still be subject to possible run-off drenchings. Current borough mayor Tim Anderson had suggested a return to the pre-1997 election formula. Before that election it required only a simple majority to win the mayor's seat. Since then the formula requires a candidate to claim at least 40 percent of the vote to win the race outright. If that is not achieved, a run-off is held between the top two candidates. The assembly, in a three to two vote, chose to stay with the 40 percent formula. Two member were not present.

There are many questions to be considered when making any decision about the voting process; in the end, only one counts. Did we get the person the voters wanted? It's true that the run-off formula is more expensive -- the polls must be reopened and staffed. Still, if the right person wins, it's hard to argue simple dollars and cents. Another question centers upon whether the run-off formula really even fits what might be called the "democratic model." Some might say, "Joe got the most votes, thus, Joe won." But there may be flaws with that argument.

In a race with several choices, the votes are dispersed over sometimes subtle differences between candidates. If there are two strong candidates, but one is hindered by an opponent with similar views, the results can be a dramatic swing toward the other strong candidate. That may well have been the case in that watershed '97 mayor's race. With six candidates running, the incumbent won the simple majority but only managed to gather 38 percent of voters. In the ensuing run-off the incumbent lost by a margin of about 700 votes. It seems clear that the chemistry of the original field hurt the person who turned out to be the "people's choice." It suggests that, though it may not be perfect, the 40 percent formula does protect the ultimate wishes of voters.

Here's the scary part. When only about 22 percent of borough residents show up at the polls for most elections, does it really matter what formula you use? At that point you could likely draw straws with as much chance of choosing the true "people's choice." But of course, that raises one of the critical questions in the democratic process. Who really are the people? In terms of elections, does "the people" include everyone in a candidate's district or constituency, or does "the people" only represent those constituents who actually go to the polls and make the decision? If you were a candidate, who would you strive to please?