Ranked Choice Tennessee envisions a future where more Tennesseans can participate in elections using ranked choice voting (RCV). Our activities fall into two main categories: civic education and advocacy. We work with election administrators, policy makers and the public to share best practices and help facilitate successful RCV elections.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter.
In this edition of the Toppling the Duopoly podcast, host Shawn Griffiths is joined by Tom Charron, who represents a new group called the California RCV Coalition (Cal RCV). At a time when ranked choice voting is gaining attention, the group is set to officially launch on September 21st during an online Zoom event that is open to the public.
Charron explains why more California cities and the state as a whole need ranked choice voting for their elections and the benefits it would bring to bolstering representation across sociopolitical demographics. The discussion examines the nonpartisan nature of ranked choice voting, which now has broad support across the political spectrum.
In this edition of How to Win Friends and Save the Republic from the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers, Rob Richie, CEO of FairVote, discusses his organization, where he finds his passion for democracy reform, and how Ranked Choice Voting faired in the Democratic primary for the New York City mayor's race.
Runoff elections often come at a high cost to taxpayers, but yield some of the lowest voter turnouts of any political contest, a new report found.
The report, released Thursday by the center-left Third Way and nonpartisan FairVote, analyzed recent runoff elections in Texas and Louisiana. In both states, an additional round of voting cost taxpayers millions of dollars, while only attracting a small share of the electorate.
The two good-government organizations suggest implementing ranked-choice voting in states that hold runoff elections in order to lessen the financial burden and preserve voter engagement.
Runoff elections were first implemented around the start of the 20th century as a tool for white Southern Democrats to unite their factions going into general elections and maintain power over Republicans. Ten states, mostly in the South, still hold runoffs if no candidate reaches the required threshold for victory — usually a majority of the vote — in the primary. Georgia and Louisiana are the only two states that also hold runoffs for general elections.
Third Way and FairVote, using public records requests, gathered data on the election expenses for seven of Texas' most populous counties, as well as for two statewide contests in Louisiana.
In 2018 and 2020, runoff elections in Harris, Dallas, Travis, Bexar, Collin, Tarrant and Fort Bend counties cost taxpayers nearly $5.5 million on top of the $11 million spent on primaries in those same jurisdictions.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
On average, voter turnout in those 2018 and 2020 contests dropped a whopping 51 percent from the primaries to their subsequent runoffs. This data shows the "strong disincentive for voters to return to the polls and vote again for the same office," the report states.
In Louisiana, the nominating contests are known as "jungle primaries." They are nonpartisan, meaning all candidates run on one initial ballot. Any candidate who captures a majority of the vote wins the race. Runoffs are therefore treated more like a general election. Still, the election spending data shows a similar problem.
The 2016 Senate primary cost taxpayers just over $6 million. Then one month later, the state spent almost the same amount (more than $5 million) on the runoff for that contest. The 2019 gubernatorial primary and subsequent runoff cost nearly the same amounts.
While turnout in the 2016 Senate runoff dropped 54 percent from the primary, voter participation actually increased by 12 percent from the 2019 gubernatorial primary to the runoff. The report says turnout was helped by the gubernatorial runoff being competitive and held in November, when voters are more likely to expect elections. As a result, the researchers recommend states schedule runoffs in November whenever possible to bolster turnout.
But the best solution, according to Third Way and FairVote, is ranked-choice voting, which is one of the core tenets of FairVote's work. In an RCV election, voters rank their preferred candidate. If no one receives a majority of first-position votes, an "instant runoff" ensues and the ballots cast for the candidate with the fewest first choices are then distributed to voters' second options. The process continues until someone has a majority.
The two groups argue RCV would reduce election costs, improve the voting experience and bolster the campaigns of women and people of color.
"States across the South are burdening voters with runoff elections by making people set aside time out of their busy days to vote in an extra round. And to kick them while they are down, in several instances, governments are using precious taxpayer dollars for this inconvenience," said David de la Fuente, senior political analyst at Third Way and one of the authors of the report.
"Ranked-choice voting would enshrine the majority rule voters want for a healthy democracy while saving their time and dime," he said.
Ranked-choice voting is currently used in 30 jurisdictions across the country, as well as statewide in Maine. Alaska will also use it statewide starting next year. In May, two dozen cities in Utah opted to use RCV for municipal elections this fall.
New York City used ranked-choice voting for citywide primaries for the first time this year, and it appears to have resulted in women being poised to dominate the city council for the first time. Advocates point to RCV as a big reason for the shift in representation.
Another alternative to plurality voting that has gained momentum in recent years is approval voting. Under that system, voters choose any number of candidates they "approve" of, and the candidate chosen the most wins. St. Louis, Mo., joined Fargo, N.D., this year as the first cities to use approval voting.
Following the citywide debut in New York City, ranked-choice voting is picking up momentum in other parts of the country.
Following the New York City primaries last month, the debate over ranked-choice voting is heating up elsewhere across the country.
The sixth largest city in Michigan and the most populous county in Washington are both considering adopting ranked-choice voting for future elections. But in Alaska, a lawsuit is challenging the state's new election system, which includes ranking candidates for general elections.
Ranked-choice voting saw a successful citywide debut in New York City, despite a tallying blunder by the Board of Elections. While some critics tried to blame the alternative voting method for the issues, proponents noted the mishap was caused by human error unrelated to RCV.
Outside of the Big Apple, ranked-choice voting was also used for the Virginia Republican Party's nominating contest for governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general. And this year almost two dozen cities in Utah have opted to switch to ranked-choice voting for mayoral and city council races.
Here are three more places where the alternative voting method is making waves:
On Monday, the Lansing City Council moved to put a ranked-choice voting initiative on the November ballot. If voters approve the measure, the new system will be adopted at the beginning of next year for mayoral, city clerk and city council elections.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
The council also approved a second ballot initiative that would eliminate local primary elections if the ranked-choice voting system is adopted. Instead, there would be a general election with a wider pool of candidates.
Currently, the only city in Michigan that uses RCV is Eastpointe.
Council members in King County, which includes Seattle, announced this week that their campaign for ranked-choice voting will be put on hold temporarily.
Last month, Girmay Zahilay and Jeanne Kohl-Welles proposed a ballot initiative to adopt RCV for certain county-level races, including the county council. The original plan was to have the new system, if approved by voters, go into effect next year. But Zahilay tweeted Monday that their proposal will be delayed until 2022 due to time constraints brought on by ballot initiative deadlines.
Update: we will postpone our ranked choice voting legislation & continue working on it for next year’s ballot. Most… https://t.co/SE27d3nEtO— Girmay Zahilay (@Girmay Zahilay)1626126527.0
Earlier this year, a bill that would have allowed cities and counties in Washington to decide which elections, if any, to use ranked-choice voting failed to pass through the Legislature. King County is exempt from that prohibition.
Last year, Alaska became the second state, after Maine, to adopt ranked-choice voting for statewide elections. Starting next year, Alaska will use a new system in which the top-four primary candidates, regardless of party, will advance to a ranked-choice general election.
Despite a majority of voters approving these reforms during last year's election, some Alaskans don't want to see the changes go into effect. This week a judge heard a case that challenges the new election system for alleged constitutional violations.
The lawsuit was filed inDecember, a day after the election results were certified, by Alaska Independence Party Chairman Robert Bird, Libertarian Scott Kohlhass and Republican attorney Kenneth Jacobus.
"Marginalizing political parties, as this system does, harms the right of Alaskans to free political association, and allows those with money to take control," Jacobus argued in a recent court filing.
However, Alaska's assistant attorney general, Margaret Paton Walsh, argued the new system does not violate the constitution and the plaintiffs' claim is just a policy objection.
