Editor:
    Should Georgians continue to use run-off elections? Your discussion of that question yesterday (Dec. 5) did what a good editorial should do, it seems to me, except for your astonishing misspelling of the bold print title word “necessary.” But even that scrambled spelling in the title of the piece made an effective contribution as an attention-getter. The question, “Are runoffs really n-e-s-s-e-c-a-r-y?” somehow wakes me up.
    And attention truly is needed concerning the important topics the editorial considered: information about the candidates, description of the office they were seeking, statistics on voter turn-out including points on the harms of such small participation, and the expense to the state in the operations of run-off elections. It was a thoughtful column.
    As you suggest, an improvement over the main short-comings about run-off elections could very well come from the voters’ ranking of their preferences on their first ballots, a procedure now used, you note, in some other states. This would seem to be in keeping with the Constitution of Georgia (Article II, Section II, Par. II): “A run-off election shall be a continuation of the general election ....”
    However, we should not lose sight of what we are trying to accomplish at the polls — a fair and accurate expression of the sovereignty of the people. Insofar as voters can put their thinking into operation through their votes, the sovereignty of the people does become at least more evident and, we hope, more productive of justice. Yet, however much we in Georgia try to improve our voting procedures, we should perhaps remind ourselves that the voices in the preambles of our national and state constitutions are never “we the voters,” but far more inclusively, are always “we the people.”