Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The case for ranked-choice voting in Texas

Texas primary voting

Texas held its primaries March 1. In some parts of the state, voters will be asked to participate in a runoff election in May, but few will likely show up at the poll.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Wasserstrum and Richards are the chair and vice chair, respectively, of Ranked Choice Voting for Texas.

On March 1, only 17.4 percent of registered Texans went to the polls to vote in our midterm primaries. On May 24, we will participate in an unnecessary party primary runoff election. Pandemic or not, runoff voting turnout has always been historically low and campaigning for a runoff between the primary and general elections can be costly. Imagine the effort and money that could be saved if a runoff election weren’t required.

Many local elections come down to a runoff, which requires people to make the effort to get out and vote a second time. But double the effort and twice the cost often lead to half the participation. Aren’t you tired of having to go to the polls twice to determine the winner of an election?


But there’s a better method for the Lone Star State: ranked-choice voting. RCV allows voters to rank their candidates in order of preference. If there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an "instant runoff." The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who ranked that candidate “No. 1” will have their votes counted for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins with 50 percent plus one of the votes.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

We began to advocate for RCV in Texas because we saw the runoff problem over and over again, from two-round primaries to local elections. In Houston, the 2015 and 2019 municipal races offered stark examples of how our current runoff system fails voters. In the 2015 election, 52,000 fewer voters cast ballots in the decisive mayoral runoff than in the general election. In 2019, voter turnout in the runoff was even lower than 2015 – and a full 15 percent lower than the general. In both these cases, runoff turnout hovered at about 20 percent of all registered voters.

When all is said and done, candidates elected by a small, shrinking fraction of voters become representatives for all of us.

The fight for RCV is even further along in our capital, Austin, where voters overwhelmingly passed a 2021 ballot measure to try ranked-choice voting for its City Council and mayoral races. This came after City Council runoff elections in December 2020, which cost Austin taxpayers $162,000 while a mere 10 percent of voters turned out. Right now, even local use of RCV isn’t allowed under Texas law, so our next step is pushing our state lawmakers to allow this voter-approved measure to take effect.

Just like winning RCV elections, we hope that the key to cities and the Legislature adopting RCV is building a broad coalition. As activists, it’s our job to engage and educate voters, candidates, and representatives on why and how RCV is the better choice for Texas. In such a diverse state, there are many reasons.

For conservatives, the two-round runoff system goes against values of small government and fiscal responsibility. Right now, we’re spending millions of hard-earned taxpayer dollars to pay for elections where few voters participate. Holding a second election also increases the risk to election integrity.

And the second election is a particularly heavy burden on our military voters, many of whom are sending their ballots from deployment overseas. Their ballots often arrive after the deadline. In fact, six other states already use RCV for military and overseas voters.

Additionally, more women and candidates of color run in RCV elections – and win. With RCV, the fear of “vote splitting” is eliminated, meaning that multiple candidates of color or female candidates can run for office without fear that they will poach votes away from other candidates with similar identities.

As we make the case, we’re buoyed by real-life examples of ranked-choice voting working in city after city across the nation. It is the fastest-growing bipartisan voting reform in the country, and has now reached 55 jurisdictions and 10 million voters across the country. States like Maine and Alaska use RCV in all federal elections, and in 2021, RCV was used in high-profile elections across the spectrum, nominating candidates as different as Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin and New York Mayor Eric Adams.

RCV is a proven solution to the problems we face here in Texas. Now, it is our job as activists and voters to make it a reality in the Lone Star State.

Read More

People holding signs against Project 2025 and Donald Trump

Protestors rally against Project 2025 and Donald Trump in New York's Times Square.

Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

Project 2025: How anti-trans proposals could impact all families

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Willie Carver has been a teacher in Kentucky since 2007, now working with college students. For over two years, he has worked with the American Federation of Teachers’ National LGBTQ+ Task Force, an advocacy arm of the influential labor union created to counter the rise and repression brought by anti-LGBTQ+ laws.

One of the country’s most draconian anti-trans measures became law in Carver’s home state last March. The law has required teachers to put politics before the wellbeing of their own students and reshaped how students see and treat each other. It bans them from being taught about gender identity or sexual orientation, using restrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity and learning about human sexuality. The law also made gender-affirming care illegal for trans youth.

Keep ReadingShow less
Perston holding a sign that reads "Project 2025 is Christian nationalism"

Opponents of Project 2025 hold a rally at Times Square on July 27.

Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

Project 2025: A blueprint for Christian nationalist regime change

Casey is a former editorial writer for The New York Times and has worked with the Kettering Foundation since 2010.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross-partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is a “presidential transition project” created as a blueprint for recruitment and indoctrination should Donald Trump become the next president. The plan calls for establishing a government that would be imbued with “biblical principles” and run by a president who holds sweeping executive powers.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump at a podium

Former President Donald Trump's campaign exploits racist dog whistles, demonizing immigrants and endorsing white nationalist rhetoric, writes Johnson.

Adam J. Dewey/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Contending with whiteness in 2024

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

The 2024 presidential campaign is shaping to be a racial reckoning for America.

With Vice President Kamala Harris positioned to shatter the glass ceiling as the first woman and person of color in the Oval Office and Donald Trump's candidacy fanning the flames of racial hatred, the election is laying bare the nation's ongoing struggle with whiteness and racial justice. As a pastor and advocate for racial reconciliation, I believe this moment will test our democracy's commitment to liberty and justice for all.

Keep ReadingShow less
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump

Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu, Andrew Leyden/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Where Harris, Trump stand on issues is less important than you think

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework," has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

Candidates for president of the United States typically run for office as though they were running for prime minister in a parliamentary democracy where their own party would have a clear majority in parliament. In such systems, which make up the vast majority of democracies in the world, the prime minister has enormous power to set policy.

In the United States, you would think that presidents are prime ministers because they always talk about what "I" will do as president based on where "I" stand on a great range of issues. While the president admittedly has much more power to set foreign policy, all major domestic policies must be passed by Congress. Indeed, Congress makes laws, while the president and the Cabinet execute them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Young man looking angry at display of his smartphone.

The inflammatory rhetoric, meaningless speculation and lack of fact checking by the media may result in young adults rejecting traditional platforms in favor of their well-being.

urbazon/Getty Images

By focusing on outrage, the media risks alienating younger audiences

Rikleen is executive director of Lawyers Defending American Democracy and the editor of “Her Honor – Stories of Challenge and Triumph from Women Judges.” Beougher is a junior at Amherst College and a co-founder ofStudents Strengthening American Democracy.

As attacks on democracy and the rule of law continually increase, much of the media refuses to address its role in intensifying the peril.

Instead of asking hard questions and insisting on answers, traditional media outlets increasingly trade news and facts for speculative commentary that ignores a story’s contextual significance. At the same time, social media outlets and influencers stoke anger as an alternative to thoughtfulness.

Keep ReadingShow less