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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less