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

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
10 Organizations Independent Voters Need to Watch

Young woman at voting booth

Canva

10 Organizations Independent Voters Need to Watch

Independent voters are no longer a political afterthought. They are the majority.

And when these voters look at the state of politics in the US, they see the lack of accountability, representation, competition, and meaningful choice that the system produces.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Gerrymandering Solution
person holding white and red box

The Gerrymandering Solution

The 250th anniversary of American independence should remind us what’s wrong with gerrymandering. Due to partisanship, however, it now not only persists but rachets tighter in a tit-for-tat cycle that threatens to strangle representative rule. There is a solution to gerrymandering, however, if only politicians will act.

Inspired by revolutionary Enlightenment Era ideals, the Declaration of Independence and the new state constitutions of 1776 call for representative rule. The people would be sovereign, they proclaimed, with governments drawing their just powers from the consent of the governed. Nothing of the sort had ever been tried on a large scale and the founders struggled with how to implement it. Everything turned on establishing a truly representative governing assembly for each newly independent colony or state.

Keep ReadingShow less