Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

DC Ranked Choice Voting at Risk: Council Moves to Stall 2026 Implementation

News

DC Ranked Choice Voting at Risk: Council Moves to Stall 2026 Implementation

Capitol building, Washington, DC

Photo by Jorge Alcala on Unsplash.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The D.C. Council may delay the implementation of ranked choice voting (RCV), frustrating pro-democracy forces that understandably want the voter-approved law in place for next year’s elections.

- YouTube youtu.be


Political insiders predictably search for procedural hurdles to try and stop changes that reduce the control of party leaders. Implementation can turn into a slow, uphill battle even after voters speak clearly. The case is no different with Initiative 83 in DC, which calls for both RCV and semi-open primaries.

"Honoring [voters'] decision does not mean rushing implementation," said Councilmember Wendell Felder at a November 24 hearing.

At-large Councilmember Anita Bonds says she's also worried the elections board doesn't have the resources and time needed to implement RCV. "We want to make sure that if we’re going to do this in the nation’s capital, it will be good as gold," Bonds said.

Voters in Washington, D.C. approved Initiative 83 on Nov. 5, 2024, with 73% support, adopting a semi-open primary system and RCV beginning in 2026.The summary statement for the initiative was as follows:

If enacted, the Initiative would both: (a) implement ranked choice voting to allow voters to rank up to five candidates according to their preference in each contest for any office (other than political party offices); and (b) permit any voter who is not registered with a political party to vote in the primary election of that voter’s choosing for all offices (other than political party offices). This Initiative will not be implemented unless the D.C. Council separately chooses to appropriate funds for the projected costs.”

In July, the DC Council approved funding for just part of the law's implementation in an 8-4 vote. The Council stopped short of funding the initiative’s open primaries component.

Next year’s races in Washington, DC, are expected to be some of the most competitive in decades. Mayor Muriel Bowser announced on November 25 that she would not seek re-election.

Nevertheless, Felder has introduced emergency legislation requiring what he called a “comprehensive needs assessment” before rollout. He questioned whether election administrators can realistically prepare the system in time for the Democratic primary in June 2026, considered the most decisive election in the heavily Democratic city.“We are not making a small change here; we’re changing the way people vote in the District of Columbia,” Felder said.

At a hearing last week, Board of Elections Director Monica Evans said the agency can still meet the deadline, but her comments suggested it would take a heroic effort to pull it off. “We’ve been asked to do the impossible in the past,” Evans said.

She testified that there is a plan and that the items that need to be finalized include ballot size and design, software updates, and an audit plan.

"Knowing that we have support from individuals who have already been in these shoes is very helpful to us as we finalize our plans and hit the ground running come January," she said.

Felder continued to ask whether she needed more time. Evans said she felt caught between opponents who want to halt the system altogether and supporters who expect immediate implementation. “I feel like I’m being set up to be the fall guy,” she said.“

Do you have sufficient resources to implement ranked choice voting in the DC Primary Election in 2026?” Ward 5 Councilmember Zachary Parker asked Evans. Evans said it was hard to answer with yes or no.

“The reason I say that is [that] more time, more money means more touch points. So we will absolutely be able to engage in a voter outreach campaign, but as far as how robust that campaign will be, that will depend on dollars,” she said.

Felder will need to persuade at least eight other council members on December 2 to support his bill delaying the law.

Ranked Choice Voting Faced Similar Challenges in Maine

In Maine, it took some time to recognize that the primary obstacle to implementing RCV was the unprecedented collusion between senior political leaders from the two major political parties. In the midst of the battle, then-Republican Governor Paul LePage threatened to continue a government shutdown and called RCV “the most horrific thing in the world.”

The Democratic opposition was not as overt but clearly as dangerous. The Democratic secretary of state, Matthew Dunlap, was unwilling to fulfill his legal responsibility to begin the implementation of RCV immediately after RCV became the law on January 7, 2017. Instead, he engaged in a legislative lobbying and public relations campaign to convince members of both parties and his government staff that it was okay to ignore and repeal the results of a free and fair election.

He argued for at least a year that RCV was impossible to implement and would result in “cars burning in the streets” of Maine. He also overestimated the cost of the reform by more than $1.4 million. Ultimately, Dunlap was forced in court to recant his absurd claims and implement the law.

RCV was first used in Maine on June 12, 2018, and voters have used it in 8 statewide elections since then without incident. RCV will be the method used in the Democratic and Republican primary elections for U.S. Congress in June 2026 where both Dunlap and LePage are currently candidates.

DC Ranked Choice Voting at Risk: Council Moves to Stall 2026 Implementation was first published by IVN and republished with permission.


Read More

CT election security group honors 10 years of fighting for democracy

A 2021 poll shows 73% of Connecticut voters supported the amendment giving all voters the option to vote by absentee ballot without needing an excuse.

(Adobe Stock)

CT election security group honors 10 years of fighting for democracy

A Connecticut voting-rights group is celebrating its 10th anniversary.

Bridgeport Generation Now has worked to broaden voting access and ensure fairer elections for city residents. Some of its most important work came at a time when many Bridgeport residents felt their votes didn't matter, pointing to absentee ballot fraud as the cause.

Keep ReadingShow less
Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test
white and black labeled box

Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test

The Supreme Court closed out its term and issued decisions that could affect millions of Americans. Among them is Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which the court decided in a 5-4 decision to uphold longstanding Mississippi law and allow mail-in ballots received post-Election Day to be counted.

The legal implications of the decision will be analyzed for months, if not years. But beyond the legal questions is a practical one: What role does mail voting actually play in helping Americans participate in elections?

Keep ReadingShow less
The New Fight Over Election Observation
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

The New Fight Over Election Observation

As a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the U.S. has signed the foundational agreement committing all participating states to open elections to external scrutiny and inviting fellow members to observe through the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). The 2024 ODIHR observation mission to the U.S. found the fundamentals reassuring—a well-run process, active engagement, free campaigning—but issued 31 recommendations to align U.S. elections with international standards and commitments. Four stand out: federal pre-clearance legislation against discriminatory election-law changes; reassessing the Electoral College; balanced representation in election administration; and guaranteed access for international and nonpartisan observers—notable, since 17 states still legally bar international observation, which is at odds with commitments made by all 57 OSCE states. Yet over a year later, follow-through is thin: no pre-clearance restoration, no Electoral College review, unchanged observer-access laws. Where movement exists—in disinformation tools, in financial disclosure—it remains piecemeal.

An uncomfortable convergence

Keep ReadingShow less
Aspirations for the American Experiment Versus the Save Act of 2026
a person is casting a vote into a box

Aspirations for the American Experiment Versus the Save Act of 2026

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act stands as the direct antithesis of our founders' aspirations for the American Experiment, eroding the core principles of popular sovereignty and individual liberty. Rather than cultivating a government that derives its "just powers from the consent of the governed," this legislative measure inverts that relationship. It transforms a natural right into a government-administered privilege, erecting bureaucratic barriers that conflict with the expansive, participatory democratic republic the Framers sought to construct.

Subverting the Consent of the Governed: the foundational premise of the American Experiment, as articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, is that the legitimacy of a government hinges entirely on the active consent of its citizens. The SAVE Act disrupts this dynamic by fundamentally shifting the burden of proof.

Keep ReadingShow less