Under-Voting A Factor In City Election Tuesday

In politics, the strategy is known as under-voting, bullet voting or single shooting. It’s when someone votes for the fewest number of available candidates to limit votes gathered by opponents. About 37,000 Colorado Springs voters followed that strategy in Tuesday’s municipal election.

Voters were allowed to choose up to five candidates from a list of 16. However, voters in many cases chose only one candidate. Incumbent council member Jan Martin is the sole council candidate to gather more than 31,000 votes on her own.

Bob Loevy, a political science professor at Colorado College, explained why the strategy is common in city at-large elections. “If you give up your other four votes, that’s one more than any other candidate, and it’s the most valuable vote you can get,” he said. “Some people base their entire campaign on getting single shots because the math is so effective.”

Loevy said most candidates rely on the strategy but few will admit it. “Once you get the (media) out of the room, that’s all they talk about,” he said.

Special interest groups, Loevy said, often follow the strategy, and it results in winners who don’t represent the entire city as at-large seats are intended to do. Loevy said the election of at-large candidates needs to change if the city is to make best use of its new strong mayor form of government.

Sean Paige, a city council member who lost in Tuesday’s election, doesn’t blame under-voting for the result. Although he said he hasn’t asked supporters to follow the strategy and doesn’t understand why a candidate would rely on it, he confessed to using it himself on Tuesday.

“I cast a bullet vote for myself,” Paige said with a smile.

Paige said unless he sees proof that candidates or voters colluded on the strategy, he’ll believe there were other reasons for his defeat.

“Some people didn’t cast all five votes because it was a large field, there was uncertainty about the candidates and some voters may have been uncomfortable with candidates they’re unfamiliar with,” said Paige. “I’m fine with that. I want informed voting, not robot voting.”

Paige said a voter should be skeptical of any candidate who believes in the strategy.

Loevy mentioned two ways the city can reduce the effect of under-voting. One way is Tuesday’s passage of Issue 1-A which reduced the number of at-large seats from five to two. Another way is a process called slotting in which certain candidates run for a specific at-large seat.

About 1,000 voters selected six or more candidates. It’s unclear what will happen to those votes.