“It’s a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” – Winston Churchill

Here’s an impossible question for you.

What do the following numbers have in common? 13, 17 and 12.

No, these are not the scores of my most recent IQ tests, smarty pants. And they obviously are not the results of my most recent body mass index measurements.

These are the voter turnout percentages from the three statewide primary runoff elections prior to this week’s runoff. This means 2022’s primary runoff had 13 percent of registered voters show up to vote while only 17 percent showed in 2020 and a measly 12 percent showed in 2018.

There was not a statewide race in the 2024 runoff election, so I did not include that year here.

To make this clear, these numbers represent the percentage of registered voters who voted in these runoff elections. It would look even worse if we included all Alabamians who are eligible to register and vote but are not registered.

Unfortunately, numbers like these are not unusual for runoff elections, and I expect the voter turnout for this week’s runoff election to be in this percentage range.

There are reasons runoff elections have sparse participation. One is we voted in the primary election only four weeks ago.

People who do not often vote tend to be less motivated to schlep back to their polling site to cast another ballot four weeks later.

Still, I like the runoff being not far removed from the primary election. If your preferred candidate did not make it through the primary, it should not take you more than a month to decide for whom to vote in the runoff.

But if the candidate you supported in the primary is in a runoff, you should have an easy decision, assuming little has changed in the four weeks in between elections.

Another reason for lower turnout is there are fewer races in which to vote since candidates who secured more than half the vote in their primary contests automatically move on to the November election without a runoff.

Fewer races lead to fewer chances for voters to get motivated to vote. If you are only voting to support your neighbor’s campaign to be elected county coroner, you are likely to skip voting in the runoff if your neighbor is not on the ballot.

Of course other factors play into limited voter participation in runoff elections such as how hotly contested the races are and the recent law preventing voting in one political party’s primary and crossing over to vote in the other party’s runoff.

Yet, the real shame about runoff elections in a one-party dominant state like Alabama is the results of these races are going to determine who will be elected to the offices being contested.

Outside of the governor’s race, the Nov. 3 general election will merely be a Republican coronation for the other statewide offices as long as the Republican candidates manage to avoid a massive scandal. That is not meant to shade the Alabama Democratic Party. It is just the current political reality.

This means an election with voter turnout percentage in the teens is likely to decide who will represent the state in vital and powerful positions like attorney general and U.S. senator. A vast majority of voters will not be involved in the decisions.

Part of the blame – and perhaps most of the blame – falls on the voters. If you want government to pay attention to your interests, you at least have to carry out the bare minimum of showing up on election days.

Frankly, it becomes easier to be an elected official when you can ignore 85 percent of registered voters because they will not bother to vote against you and focus your attention on the 15 percent who do vote.

This was just as true when Democrats ruled the roost in Alabama as it is now under Republican dominance.

Alabama’s election structure must also share the blame, though. If voters are not interested in showing up for runoff elections, maybe we should not have them.

My solution is to put everyone from all parties on the ballot for the primary election and then move the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, forward to the November election. It saves the state money and saves the voters’ time by not having a runoff election for which few people have any enthusiasm.

Is there a better way to do this? I am open to ideas. I started the article with an impossible question, but I hope I am not ending it with another.