Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Exit polls show smooth first run for ranked voting in NYC

New York City
Darwin Fan/Getty Images

The premier of ranked-choice voting in New York City appears to have gone smoothly as exit polling shows most voters found the new system easy to use.

Voters in Queens used ranked ballots for the first time in last month's special elections for city council. Advocates for RCV are sure to lean on the voter survey, released Thursday, as they prepare for a far bigger test: the city's mayoral primaries in June.


Almost every voter surveyed said they found ranked-choice voting simple to use, with 80 percent indicating it was "very simple." (Critics of RCV say the system is too complicated.) Three-quarters of the voters said they were familiar with RCV before using it for the first time, indicating the Board of Elections ran a successful educational campaign in the run-up to the special elections.

Under this alternative voting system, voters choose candidates in order of preference. In the case that no candidate receives majority support, the election goes into an instant runoff in which the candidate with the least votes is eliminated and that person's support is redistributed to voters' second choices. This continues until one candidate crosses the 50 percent threshold.

While most voters ranked at least two candidates on their ballot, 39 percent of those surveyed only selected one candidate. The most common reason for this singular choice was "that was the only candidate I liked."

Asian voters were the most supportive of ranked-choice voting, with 77 percent approving of its continued use. Two-thirds of Black voters also favored the new voting system. But a slight majority of white voters (51 percent) were against using RCV. (The sample size of Latino voters was too small to achieve statistical significance for this question.)

The exit poll surveyed 635 in-person and absentee voters in the Feb. 2 and Feb. 23 special elections for city council districts in Queens. Voters were polled as they left the early voting or Election Day polling locations or, in the case of absentee voters, via email and phone. The survey, available in English and Spanish, was conducted by Edison Research for Rank the Vote NYC.

Read More

Why Doing Immigration the “White Way” Is Wrong

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Why Doing Immigration the “White Way” Is Wrong

The president is granting refugee status to white South Africans. Meanwhile, he is issuing travel bans, unsure about his duty to uphold due process, fighting birthright citizenship, and backing massive human rights breaches against people of color, including deporting citizens and people authorized to be here.

The administration’s escalating immigration enforcement—marked by “fast-track” deportations or disappearances without due process—signal a dangerous leveling-up of aggressive anti-immigration policies and authoritarian tactics. In the face of the immigration chaos that we are now in, we could—and should—turn our efforts toward making immigration policies less racist, more efficient, and more humane because America’s promise is built on freedom and democracy, not terror. As social scientists, we know that in America, thinking people can and should “just get documented” ignores the very real and large barriers embedded in our systems.

Keep ReadingShow less
Insider trading in Washington, DC

U.S. senators and representatives with access to non-public information are permitted to buy and sell individual stocks. It’s not just unethical; it sends the message that the game is rigged.

Getty Images, Greggory DiSalvo

Insider Trading: If CEOs Can’t Do It, Why Can Congress?

Ivan Boesky. Martha Stewart. Jeffrey Skilling.

Each became infamous for using privileged, non-public information to profit unfairly from the stock market. They were prosecuted. They served time. Because insider trading is a crime that threatens public trust and distorts free markets.

Keep ReadingShow less
Supreme Court Changes the Game on Federal Environmental Reviews

A pump jack seen in a southeast New Mexico oilfield.

Getty Images, Daniel A. Leifheit

Supreme Court Changes the Game on Federal Environmental Reviews

Getting federal approval for permits to build bridges, wind farms, highways and other major infrastructure projects has long been a complicated and time-consuming process. Despite growing calls from both parties for Congress and federal agencies to reform that process, there had been few significant revisions – until now.

In one fell swoop, the U.S. Supreme Court has changed a big part of the game.

Keep ReadingShow less