Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ranked-choice voting faces newly balky path in several states

2016 Democratic Caucus in Nevada

While the DNC has stopped Iowa and Nevada from allowing remote participation in the 2020 caucuses, ranked-choice voting seems likely to survive in Nevada.

David Calvert/Getty Images

The prospects for ranked-choice voting are uncertain in a handful of states that had shown momentum as the fall begins and the 2020 campaign shifts into a more intense gear.

Just days ago, the future looked brighter for one of the more revolutionary parts of the democracy reform agenda, which seeks in part to grow consensus-building and shrink polarization in politics: holding elections where voters list all the candidates they can live with in order of preference, with the winner often emerging as a person ranked close to the top on the most number of ballots.

The biggest potential setback since has come in Iowa, where Democrats hoped to couple a debut for ranked-choice voting in presidential elections with the rollout of online participation in the 2020 caucuses.

But last week national party leaders rejected the proposals from Iowa and Nevada to allow remote participation, concluding that concerns the fledgling systems could be hacked outweighed the desire to make it easier for people to participate.


Iowa, which had planned to allow its virtual caucus-goers to rank the Democratic field and assign a small share of delegates that way, now has less than two weeks to come up with an alternate way of testing ranked-choice voting that can meet Democratic National Committee approval. Or the party leaders may choose to scrap the idea.

One option is for Iowans to adopt the system in place in Nevada, where plans for early in-person voting using the ranked-choice method are likely to remain even though RCV has been scrapped in the virtual caucuses.

"We concur with the advice of the DNC's security experts that there is no tele-caucus system available that meets our standard of security and reliability given the scale needed for the Iowa and Nevada caucuses and the current cyber-security climate," read a joint statement Friday by DNC Chairman Tom Perez and the co-chairs of the party rules committee, Lorraine Miller and Jim Roosevelt.

Meanwhile, RCV advocates are waiting intently to see if Maine's Democratic governor, Janet Mills, will sign legislation to allow voters to rank candidates in the March presidential primary. The bill cleared the Democratic state Senate last week on a party-line vote, giving Mills until the end of the week to make a decision.

Maine is the first state to use RCV in statewide elections, including congressional races, but the governor is being lobbied heavily by both sides of the debate over whether the system should be expanded to the presidential nominating contests.

A group of Alaskans has initiated a petition to make their home the second with statewide RCV. But Republican Lt. Gov. Kevin Meyer, who has power over such matters, last week rejected the petitioners' call for a 2020 ballot initiative.

Meyer said the state's attorney general, Kevin Clarkson, recommended he decline to certify the initiative because it violates the requirement that such proposals be on a single subject. (The Alaska initiative also called for replacing the state's party-affiliated primary elections with a single statewide primary and changing the state's campaign finance laws to eliminate "dark money" contributions to political campaigns.)

Officials with Alaskans for Better Elections, the group behind the initiative, released a statement saying they disagree with Clarkson's opinion and are considering filing an appeal in court.

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