Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ranked-choice voting backers eye momentum from NYC victory

New York City

Ranked-choice voting will now be used in the 2021 elections for mayor and city council in New York.

Istvan Kadar Photography/Getty Images

Ranked-choice voting just made it big in the biggest town for making it — New York City. And supporters of this way of conducting elections hope to use the victory there to spread it, well, everywhere.

With more than 90 percent of the precincts reporting Wednesday morning, almost three-quarters of voters (73.5 percent) endorsed bringing ranked-choice voting to the nation's biggest city. The new system, which allows people to rank as many as five candidates in order of preference, will be used in primary and special elections beginning with the races in 2021 for mayor, city council and several other municipal offices.

Known as RCV and also the instant-runoff system, ranking candidates has become one of the big election-improvement darlings of the democracy reform movement.

Less sweeping measures for improving governance were on ballots in Maine, Kansas and Denver, and all of them succeeded.


Detractors say the ranked-choice system is confusing and puts too much trust in election officials and their computers, which could be avenues for fraud. But advocates say it provides voters with more viable choices and an incentive for candidates to remain positive in their campaigns — so they might earn at least a second-place vote. It also saves taxpayer money by eliminating the need for costly runoff elections.

And, proponents argue, by providing a truer reflection of the will of voters, the RCV method promotes stronger turnout. That is sorely needed in New York, as was on clear display Tuesday. Fewer than 645,000 votes, or about 11 percent of the city's voting age population, participated in the referendum.

"In approving this simple, intuitive reform, the voters of New York have shown their commitment to consensus and civility over divisiveness and discord," said Kevin Johnson, executive director of Election Reformers Network, which advocates for changing voting systems to boost faith in democracy.

Under the New York version, if no individual candidate has a majority of the first-choice votes, the person receiving the fewest votes will be eliminated and the second choices by those voters are distributed among the other candidates. This process is continued until only two candidates remain. At that point, the candidate with the most votes wins.

Eleven cities in eight states — including San Francisco, St. Paul, Minn., and Portland, Maine — used ranked-choice voting this month to elect local officials. Meanwhile, voters in Easthampton, Mass., also approved ranked-choice voting Tuesday.

Next up for activists are Massachusetts and Alaska, according to FairVote, the most visible national organization pushing ranked-choice voting.

Proponents in Massachusetts are gathering signatures to get a measure on the 2020 ballot that would apply RCV to all state and federal elections, while a judge in Alaska gave the go-ahead last month for supporters to gather signatures for a similar ballot measure.

Bills have been introduced on Capitol Hill to apply RCV to all House and Senate contests, but they stand no chance of enactment by the currently divided Congress.

Besides ranked-choice voting, New Yorkers also approved a slow-the-revolving-door measure that will require elected officials and senior appointed officials to wait two years before appearing before the agencies where they once worked.

The other successful ballot measures that democracy reformers were watching Tuesday:

  • Requiring the Denver mayor and other officials to live in the city and city council members to live in their districts. It was approved with 90 percent support.
  • Ending the way Kansas adjusts its population counts (not counting military personnel stationed in the state and college students at their campuses) for the purpose of drawing legislative boundaries. It garnered 60 percent support.
  • Allowing disabled citizens in Maine to better participate in politics by permitting alternative methods to sign petitions for ballot initiatives. That was embraced by 76 percent.

Read More

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
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less