Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Bill would require ranked-choice voting for congressional elections

"Vote Here" sign
Grace Cary

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum.

Three members of Congress are hoping to bring ranked-choice voting, which has been growing at the state and municipal levels, to congressional elections.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) and Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) on Thursday introduced the Ranked Choice Voting Act, which would change how all members of Congress are elected. In addition, the bill would authorize funding to assist states to help them educate voters and implement RCV-compliant systems for primary and general elections by 2028.


In an RCV election, voters may rank multiple candidates in order of preference. The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, with that person’s support redistributed to voters’ second choices. The process continues until a candidate has a majority of the votes or there are only two candidates remaining.

Supporters believe this process, in addition to guaranteeing the winner has majority support, reduces partisanship because candidates need to appeal to voters beyond their party base in order to attract second- and third-place votes.

“In an increasingly polarized Congress, it’s become ever more difficult to produce pragmatic legislation and solutions that benefit the American people,” Beyer said. “By implementing ranked-choice voting, which ensures that winners are elected with majority popular support, we can encourage the election of leaders who build broad and diverse coalitions and are focused on solutions rather than divisive rhetoric. This would increase voter satisfaction and be a great win for a healthier democracy.”

Two states already use RCV for federal elections. Both Maine and Alaska use it in general elections, but Alaska’s general election follows an open primary in which all candidates run on the same ballot. The four candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party, advance to November.

The legislation would give states some latitude on implementation.

“It’s permissive of both [the Maine and Alaska] types depending on what the state prefers,” said Deb Otis, director of research and policy for FairVote, a nonprofit organization that advocates for RCV and has played a central role in building support for the bill.

In a minor twist on RCV, the bill would continue the runoff process until there are two final candidates, rather than until one candidate has a majority of the votes.

“It’s a distinction without a difference,” said Otis. “It doesn’t change who wins … and provides some extra clarity on voter preference.”

Nearly 50 counties and cities use, or have approved use of, RCV for municipal elections, including New York, San Francisco, Minneapolis and a dozen cities in Utah.

Voters in Nevada, Oregon, Colorado and Idaho will decide whether to move forward with RCV in their states when they cast ballots this fall. A ballot initiative in Alaska seeks to repeal the 2020 voter initiative that instituted RCV elections.

The bill faces a difficult path in Congress. Lawmakers are only expected to be in session for a few more weeks before heading home to campaign in advance of Election Day, and those remaining work days will likely be devoted to spending bills and a handful of other matters. But more time might not make a difference.

RCV, despite being a nonpartisan solution to concerns about elections being won with less than a majority of support, tends to attract opposition from Republicans. And with the GOP controlling the House, the bill would face long odds even at the beginning of a congressional session. The same goes for the Senate, where most legislation needs to overcome a procedural hurdle that requires getting 60 votes in the nearly evenly divided, 100-person chamber.

“Obviously at FairVote we would love for all of our bills to pass this session. But we understand politics and it’s not likely,” said Ryan Suto, FairVote’s interim director of government affairs. “But it’s a time when a lot of people are talking about politics and voters are frustrated with their election system. So this is a good time to make sure this conversation continues. So people who don’t know about ranked-choice voting are reached.”

Other bills aiming to change elections have faced similar partisan roadblocks in recent years. Democrats have pushed comprehensive reform bills like the Freedom to Vote Act and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Neither made it through Capitol Hill, with Republicans often arguing that states have authority over election laws, not Congress.

But advocates of the new bill believe the Constitution is on their side.

“The Constitution's text is clear. The federal government many times in our history has found it necessary to regulate the time, place and manner of elections,” Suto said. “Everyone being on a level playing field, playing by the same rules, is important.”

Republicans have been pushing their own elections bill this year, one that would reiterate existing law that declares noncitizens may not vote in federal elections. Members of the House leadership planned to attach that bill to a spending bill that needs to be passed before the end of the month in order to avoid a partial government shutdown, but Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) pulled the appropriations measure from consideration Wednesday when it became clear he did not have the votes to pass it.

Read More

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
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less