Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Georgia legislators exploring ranked-choice voting

Georgia voting stickers
Megan Varner/Getty Images

The next state to dip a toe into alternative voting methods may be Georgia, where lawmakers are considering a bipartisan proposal far different from recent election changes that drew national criticism from voting rights advocates.

Members of the Georgia General Assembly have introduced legislation that would allow the use of instant runoff, or ranked-choice, for local elections, potentially creating significant savings in a state that often has to hold an additional round of voting after Election Day.


Versions of the legislation have been introduced in both chambers, and with both Republican and Democratic sponsors. While these bills would only impact municipal elections, successful implementation could lead to changes for federal and state elections. Last year, Georgia approved ranked-choice voting for military and overseas voters.

Georgia holds runoff elections when no candidate in a race earns a majority of the vote. In November 2020, when Georgia had two Senate races, both contests had to go to a runoff. Election administrators in Fulton, the state’s most populous county, had to spend another $6.1 million on the January 2021 elections, on top of the $38 million spent in 2020.

And last year, approximately 30 municipalities required runoffs, including Atlanta, according to Thomas Gehl, director of governmental relations of the Georgia Municipal Association

“We’re getting positive comments from legislators about it,” said Gehl, whose organization supports the proposal because it's optional and could create cost savings.

Both Gehl and Bill Bozarth, treasurer of the RCV-backing group Better Ballot Georgia, believe it is too early to say whether this bill would lead to broader use of instant runoffs in the state. But Bozarth said success at the local level could create some momentum.

“We think that the sponsors of this bill have acted wisely in putting something forward that the General Assembly could be comfortable with,” he said. “If successful I would fully expect us to pivot to working with some municipalities to start experimenting.”

In an RCV system, voters rank their preferred candidates on one ballot. If a candidate received a majority of first-choice votes, the election is complete. But if no one receives a majority, the candidate with the fewest appearances in the top spot is eliminated and their support is automatically redistributed to voters’ second choice. This continues until someone has a majority.

Use of ranked-choice voting has been expanding around the country, with New York City using it for the first time last year and Alaska adopting it for statewide elections. More than 50 jurisdictions may use RCV in the next few years, according to the RCV advocates at FairVote.

Voters in Memphis had approved the use of RCV but the Tennessee General Assembly recently passed a bill prohibiting it.

The 2021 law that permitted RCV for overseas voters was more widely known for tightening the voting rules. The changes included new voter ID requirements, limits on ballot drop boxes, new deadlines for absentee voting, and restrictions on handing out food or water to people waiting in line. The Republican-driven changes followed Joe Biden’s narrow victory in the state, the first time a Democrat won Georgia since 1992.

Democrats, voting rights groups and some corporations were highly critical of the law, and Major League Baseball pulled its 2021 All Star Game out of the state.


Read More

How My Benzodiazepine Experience Impacted the Trust I Have in the Healthcare System
a doctor showing a patient something on the tablet
Photo by Nappy on Unsplash

How My Benzodiazepine Experience Impacted the Trust I Have in the Healthcare System

During my junior year of high school, I was prescribed my first benzodiazepine, called lorazepam, at 16 years of age. At the time, my parents and I did not understand the potential consequences of long-term use of benzos. Like so many other patients out there, we trusted that the healthcare system would not only provide treatment and correct guidance to move forward with my prescriptions, but I never realized they would be the force that would ruin my future and so many dreams I had for my young adulthood.

What followed was a years-long struggle with severe medication dependence and withdrawal that fundamentally changed my life for the worse.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitution of the United State with the U.S. flag in the background.

The Framers designed a republic with the intention to manage factionalism through deliberate compromise and institutional guardrails, whereas 21st-century polarization often treats compromise as a moral failing.

Douglas Sacha, Getty Images

Our Framers on 21st Century Primaries and Polarization

The Framers would view 21st-century closed primaries and political polarization as the exact manifestation of "factionalism" they spent the 1787 Constitutional Convention trying to prevent. They would argue these systems force candidates to appeal to ideological extremes rather than the broad, moderate consensus required for stable governance.

The Danger of Factionalism: In Federalist No. 10, James Madison defined a "faction" as a group of citizens united by a passion or interest adverse to the rights of others. He argued that while factions are inevitable, their effects must be controlled. The Framers would recognize 21st-century hyper-polarization as the dominance of unyielding factions that prioritize absolute ideological purity over democratic compromise.

Keep ReadingShow less

Are State Courts More Protective of Transgender People than Federal Courts?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that state laws prohibiting trans women and girls from participating on female sports teams do not violate the Equal Protection Clause — the seventh Supreme Court ruling curbing the rights of trans people in just the past 14 months. Since May 2025, the Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to ban trans people from serving in the military, upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for trans minors, given anti-LGBTQ+ parents a veto over LGBTQ+-inclusive content in their children’s classrooms, endorsed Trump’s policy requiring trans people to list their sex assigned at birth on their passports, reinstated an injunction against policies barring schools from outing trans students to their parents against students’ wishes, and determined that Colorado’s ban on anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy must be subjected to strict scrutiny, a form of judicial review that almost no law survives.

However, there may be some cause for optimism. In an article published in The Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, I conducted a comprehensive survey of state court cases that impacted the rights and lives of trans people between 2022 and 2024. The survey showed state courts have an essential role to play in protecting trans people in an increasingly hostile political environment. Amongst some ominous signs for trans rights, there were important signals of hope in the survey.

Keep ReadingShow less