Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Wisconsin Lawmakers Propose Ranked Choice Voting for All Elections

News

Wisconsin Lawmakers Propose Ranked Choice Voting for All Elections

Woman casts vote.

Image: Getty Images on Unsplash. Unsplash+ license obtained by IVN Editor Shawn Griffiths.

BELOIT, Wis. — State Senator Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) and Representative Clinton Anderson (D-Beloit) introduced LRB-5709 on March 5, legislation that would implement ranked choice voting for state, federal, and local elections in Wisconsin.

The Wisconsin legislation would also eliminate the need for February primaries in nonpartisan elections.


Today, voters in Wisconsin almost never elect independent candidates, because the state’s elections are decided by first-past-the-post plurality voting (FPPV). In this system, a voter’s expression of preference is restricted to a single candidate. Each voter has just one choice, and if there are more than two candidates in the race, winning by plurality rather than majority is quite possible.

Consequently, no matter how attractive an independent candidate may seem in the spring, summer, and early fall of an election year, he or she will be tarnished as a “spoiler” on Election Day and will almost certainly lose.

This unfortunate situation reduces the supply of independent candidates willing to compete and perpetually forces Americans into one of two warring factions.

In contrast, ranked-choice voting (RCV) allows voters to express their true preference for each candidate by ranking them in order of preference.

If no candidate wins an outright majority, the candidate with the lowest number of first-place votes is eliminated, and the second-preference votes of his or her supporters are redistributed to the remaining candidates.

This “instant runoff” process continues until a majority winner is determined. Not only does RCV give voters “more voice” in elections, but it also has the potential to stop our political system from tearing us apart into two camps.

Senator Spreitzer called the bill an improvement over a system that forces strategic voting.

"Under ranked choice voting, voters can vote for the candidate they like the most instead of having to strategically vote against the candidate they like the least," he said.

"It is a system that encourages positive campaigns, ensures that winners have the support of a majority of voters, and allows more candidates to run without being seen as a waste of a vote or a spoiler."

Representative Anderson pointed to existing models as evidence that the system works.

"Ranked choice voting is not a new idea. It's already working in states like Maine and Alaska, and in cities like New York City," he said.

"Our current system rewards candidates for tearing each other down instead of building broad support. Ranked choice voting changes that. It encourages campaigns focused on issues and coalition-building, ensures nominees win with a true majority, and creates space for more voices beyond the two-party system."

For the best analysis of the pernicious effects of a lack of competition in our political system, please read The Politics Industry by Wisconsinite Katherine M. Gehl and her co-author, Harvard Business School professor Michael E. Porter.

Cara Brown McCormick is the principal at Smart Campaigns and advises on strategy and research.

Wisconsin Lawmakers Propose Ranked Choice Voting for All Elections was originally published by Independent Voter News and is republished with permission.



Read More

How A 2022 Law Changed Election Certification: Assessing the Electoral Count Reform Act

A sign that reads: Voting

E4C

How A 2022 Law Changed Election Certification: Assessing the Electoral Count Reform Act

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • The Electoral Count Reform (ECRA) of 2022 modernizes the 1887 Electoral Count Act, which governed how Congress counts Electoral College votes. The original Act has been widely criticized as vague and susceptible to exploitation.
  • The ECRA clarifies that the Vice President’s role is ceremonial, raises the objection threshold to 20 percent of both chambers, and designates governors as responsible for submitting elector certificates.
  • Supporters argue that the bipartisan reform prevents future election disputes and protects democratic stability, while critics contend that it was rushed, doesn’t address deeper election integrity issues, and raises concerns about federalism.
  • The Act reflects bipartisan cooperation but continues debates about federalism and the balance of power between states and Congress.

The Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act (ECRA) was introduced by Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) in July 2022 and signed into law by President Joe Biden in December 2022. It is a reform to the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA), a law that governs how Congress counts the Electoral College votes for president every four years. The Act is also a response to President Donald Trump’s efforts to dispute the 2020 presidential election results, which revealed several gaps in the law that could be exploited by a presidential candidate.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bipartisan War on Independent Voters
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

The Bipartisan War on Independent Voters

The Washington Post editorial board penned a bold piece (Bill Cassidy and America’s Increasingly Broken Primary System) in the wake of President Trump’s successful vendetta against the Louisiana Senator. They could have taken the easy route and pointed a finger at the Republicans. Instead, they took issue with both parties and their insatiable appetite to control the rules of the game and punish anyone who steps out of line.

In a media landscape dominated by partisan propaganda, it’s refreshing to read an opinion piece that encourages readers to actually look at what’s happening.

Keep ReadingShow less
Oregon Pioneered Vote-by-Mail. Its Ballot Access Laws Are Still in the Covered Wagon Era.
white printer paper on white table

Oregon Pioneered Vote-by-Mail. Its Ballot Access Laws Are Still in the Covered Wagon Era.

Oregon's primary election was on May 19. Neither of the two major-party candidates in Oregon's 6th Congressional District faced a primary opponent. They'll automatically advance to November's general election ballot, without a single voter really needing to weigh in, without collecting a single petition signature, and without knocking on a single door. The Democratic incumbent represents a party that accounts for 29.75 percent of registered voters in this district. The Republican nominee represents a party with 24.78 percent of the vote. Together, the two parties represent a minority of OR-6's electorate, and both of their candidates are already on the November ballot.

I represent the largest voting bloc in this district. Nearly 40 percent of OR-6's registered voters are unaffiliated, more than either party. These voters have never had a candidate who answers only to them—not to party bosses, party lines, or special interests. I am trying to be that candidate. And I am still on the porch, clipboard in hand, collecting the 5,500 hand-signed paper petitions I will need just to guarantee that my name appears beside theirs in November.

Keep ReadingShow less
Election Officials Warn of Rising Threats As Security Funding Declines Ahead of Midterms

Reps. Laurel Lee (R-Fla) and Terri Sewell (D-Ala) at Wednesday’s House Administration Elections Subcommittee hearing titled, “Examining Best Practices for Strengthening Election Security.”

(Kaitlin Bender-Thomas/MedillNews Service)

Election Officials Warn of Rising Threats As Security Funding Declines Ahead of Midterms

WASHINGTON –Election officials warned lawmakers on Wednesday that threats against election workers and voting systems are escalating even as federal funding for election security remains far below 2020 levels, posing risks ahead of the 2026 midterms.

In 2020, Congress allocated $425 million for election security grants, compared to $15 million in 2025 and $45 million this year. The Trump administration has also proposed a $707 million cut to the CyberSecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s fiscal 2027 budget and ended the agency’s election security support for state and local governments.

Keep ReadingShow less