Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democrats take another crack at federal election reform

People speaking in front of the Capitol

Rep. Don Beyer, speaking in front of the Capitol, announces the reintroduction of the Fair Representation Act on March 20.

Courtesy FairVote

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum.

Election reform advocates have many suggestions for improving the system. Among the most popular ideas are ranked-choice voting and redistricting reform – two major components of a bill introduced by a group of House members last week.

On March 20, Rep. Don Beyer (Va.) and a half-dozen of his fellow Democratic lawmakers presented the latest version of the Fair Representation Act, which would require the use of RCV for all congressional elections, establish multimember House districts, and institute rules to prevent partisan and racial gerrymandering.


"The Fair Representation Act offers vital solutions to the hyper-partisan gerrymandering and lack of electoral competition that has allowed extremist ideologies to hijack our political discourse and sewn public distrust of our political system,” Beyer said. “Our bill would implement critical reforms to strengthen our electoral system, ensure every voter has their voice represented, and restore public trust.”

This is the third iteration of the bill, which has yet to make it through the House of Representatives. And with Republicans controlling the chamber, the Democratic-backed bill is not going to pass this year either. But the immediate goal is awareness, not enactment, according to outside supporters of the bill.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

“It’s a long-term strategy. Every time, [the bill] has been getting more cosponsors and more attention,” said Ryan Suto, senior policy advisor at the nonpartisan election reform group FairVote. “We see this Congress as an opportunity to have more converastions and socialize it more.”

Now that the latest version has been formally introduced, the co-sponsors and advocates will begin the campaign to add more supporters. In addition to Beyer, the bill has the backing of Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin (who serves as co-lead) and five additional original co-sponsors: Reps. Earl Bluemnauer (Ore.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Jim McGovern (Mass.) and Scott Peters (Calif.).

Prior to reintroducing the bill, that group made two “tweaks,” according to Deb Otis, FairVote’s director of research and policy, that are designed to grant states more flexibility in implementing the measure’s requirements.

Earlier versions of the bill would have required states to assign congressional redistricting to independent commissions. But the new bill does not set a requirement for who draws the lines; instead, it requires the chosen body to follow a series of guidelines, including: equal population counts across districts, compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, representation for minority communities, and preventing single-party dominance in multimember districts.

Only a handful of states have truly independent redistricting commissions. In most states, lawmakers have some say, either by producing the maps within the state legislatures, retaining the authority to approve (or not) the independent commissions’ work, or by appointing political operatives to redistricting bodies. The states would continue to assign redistricting duties as they see fit, but must meet the bill’s anti-gerrymandering criteria.

This shift, according to Otis, brings that portion of the bill in line with the Freedom to Vote Act, a sweeping election reform measure introduced by Democratic lawmakers in 2022.

The other significant change involves the threshold for creating multimember districts.

Currently, each House district is represented by one lawmaker. But in a proportional, multimember system, more than one person would be elected in order to grant minority voices a share of the representation – needing as little as 17 percent of the vote to gain a seat. Take, for example, Massachusetts. About one-third of the state’s voters are Republicans, but all of its House members are Democrats because that party has a majority in each district. In a multimember system, Republicans would be able to win a proportional share of the seats and have a voice in the House.

In the first two iterations of the Fair Representation Act, any state that currently has five or fewer House members would instead have one at-large representative, with larger states moving to the multimember design. The language in this year’s bill would deploy the multimember structure to states that have a minimum of seven House members under the current system. That change was made, according to Otis, because certain states – such as Oregon – would not be able to meet the requirement for minority representation at the lower level.

The third component of the bill, ranked-choice voting, is being adopted more and more by states and cities. (FairVote regularly calls RCV the fastest-growing election reform in the country.)

In a standard election, the person with the most votes wins, even if they are not picked on a majority of the ballots. In an RCV election, voters rank the candidates in order of preference. If someone gets a majority of first-choice votes, they win. If not, the person with the fewest first-place votes is eliminated and those ballots are redistributed to voters’ second choices. The process continues until someone has a majority.

RCV advocates say, in addition to ensuring elected officials are supported by a majority of voters, such a system will lead to more civil elections and bipartisanship because candidates will need to appeal to more than their base voters in order to secure second- or third-choice position on ballots.

Now that the bill has been introduced, the co-sponsors and outside advocates will be trying to drum up support on both sides of the aisle.

“In this Congress it’s been difficult to do anything in a bipartisan manner,” Suto said about finding Republican support. “But those are doors that we’ll knock on.”

Other organizations, such as RepresentWomen and the Interfaith Alliance, will join the multiprong effort, which will point to past successes as part of the pitch.

“A big part of FairVote’s strategy is promoting where these reforms are a success in other parts of the country,” said Otis.

Two states – Alaska and Maine – use ranked-choice voting in their elections. Maine uses it for state-level primaries and federal general elections. Alaska uses it for its “top four” system:

All candidates for office run on one primary ballot. The four with the most votes, regardless of party, advance to the general election, which uses an RCV ballot. Reform advocates and election watchers say that system led to the election of centrist lawmakers, rather than more extreme candidates, in 2022.

Ranked-choice voting is also used in dozens of cities and states around the country, including New York, San Francisco and Salt Lake City. Voters in Portland, Ore., will use RCV for the first time this fall.

Supporters hope to win further advancements in November, as RCV proposals will be on the ballot in Nevada and Oregon. “We’re also keeping an eye on Colorado, Idaho and Washington, D.C.,” said Otis. “It could be up to a dozen cities.”

Read More

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

Someone filling out a ballot.

Getty Images / Hill Street Studios

Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

In the 2024 U.S. election, several states did not pass ballot initiatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) despite strong majority support from voters under 65. Still, RCV was defended in Alaska, passed by a landslide in Washington, D.C., and has earned majority support in 31 straight pro-RCV city ballot measures. Still, some critics of RCV argue that it does not enhance and promote democratic principles as much as forms of proportional representation (PR), as commonly used throughout Europe and Latin America.

However, in the U.S. many people have not heard of PR. The question under consideration is whether implementing RCV serves as a stepping stone to PR by building public understanding and support for reforms that move away from winner-take-all systems. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of respondents (N=1000) on the 2022 Cooperative Election Survey (CES), results show that individuals who favor RCV often also know about and back PR. When comparing other types of electoral reforms, RCV uniquely transfers into support for PR, in ways that support for nonpartisan redistricting and the national popular vote do not. These findings can inspire efforts that demonstrate how RCV may facilitate the adoption of PR in the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less