Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democrats start symbolic bid to make ranked-choice voting the national standard

Rep. Jamie Raskin

Rep. Jamie Raskin plans to introduce a bill that would mandate ranked-choice voting be used in all federal elections.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Advocates for ranked-choice voting announced Monday the freshest step in their effort to build a national movement around the form of voting that allows people to support more than one candidate.

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, who represents Maryland suburbs north of Washington, said he would introduce a bill in the House this week to mandate all federal elections be conducted using ranked-choice voting.

At least in the short term, however, the legislative drive will be entirely about political messaging and raising awareness of RCV. The bill stands no chance of enactment by the currently divided Congress. And advocates of this form of voting almost always frame their cause as persuading the other 49 states, one at a time, to embrace Maine in applying this process to congressional and presidential contests.


"People will be able to vote for exactly who they want," Raskin said at a news conference with his primary co-sponsor, Democratic Rep. Don Beyer, who represents suburban Virginia just outside D.C.

The two also introduced a bill in July that included ranked-choice voting but had other reform provisions, including establishing independent commissions to draw the legislative district maps after the decennial census.

Under RCV, voters list candidates in order of preference and, if no one secures an outright majority of No. 1 votes, a sort of automatic runoff takes place. The candidate with the fewest first place votes is eliminated, those ballots are re-allocated to others based on their second place markings, and that process continues until someone has a majority.

Raskin said this has three advantages, because it would:

  • Guarantee the winners enjoy support from a majority of their constituents. Now, in races with multiple candidates, the victor may secure much less than 50 percent of the vote.
  • Reduce negative campaigning, because candidates would have an incentive to try to be an acceptable second choice for voters who rank someone else as No. 1.
  • Eliminate the need for in-person runoffs elections, which are costly and usually have far lower turnout than the original election.

Critics of ranked-choice voting fear the system would confuse voters and make balloting vulnerable to fraud.

Beyer said he was skeptical of the idea at first but is now a "true believer."

He described his frustration with a Congress that has less than a 20 percent approval rating and has a hollowed-out political center because of partisan politics.

Rob Richie, president of FairVote, the nonpartisan group most responsible for pushing for expanded use of ranked-choice voting, used the news conference to tout other developments going on at the state and local level across the country.

Among the highlights: New York City will vote on a ballot initiative this fall that would implement ranked-choice voting in municipal elections, and organizers in Massachusetts are attempting to collect 120,000 signatures to get a ranked-choice voting referendum on the ballot in 2020.

Democrats in several states — including Hawaii, Alaska, Kansas and Wyoming — are planning to use ranked-choice voting in their 2020 primaries, although the Democratic National Committee has yet to sign off on states' voting plans.

Plans for the presidential debut of ranked-choice voting in the crucial first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses have been scrapped for now.

Read More

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’
Independent Voter News

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’

The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation.

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project developed a “Redistricting Report Card” that takes metrics of partisan and racial performance data in all 50 states and converts it into a grade for partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Vote Here" sign

America’s political system is broken — but ranked choice voting and proportional representation could fix it.

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

Election Reform Turns Down the Temperature of Our Politics

Politics isn’t working for most Americans. Our government can’t keep the lights on. The cost of living continues to rise. Our nation is reeling from recent acts of political violence.

79% of voters say the U.S. is in a political crisis, and 64% say our political system is too divided to solve the nation’s problems.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less