Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Ranked choice voting won election day 2023

Ranked choice voting won election day 2023
Getty Images

Ashley Houghton is the Vice President of Programs and Policy at FairVote, a nonpartisan organization seeking better elections.

Deb Otis is the Director of Research and Policy at FairVote.


In the wake of the 2023 elections, the bulk of media coverage and analysis has understandably focused on whether Democrats or Republicans have more momentum going into 2024. But there’s no question that Election Day 2023 gave momentum to the fastest-growing nonpartisan voting reform in the nation: ranked choice voting.

On November 7, eleven cities across six states used ranked choice voting (RCV) in their elections, including Boulder, Colorado, which used RCV for the first time to elect their mayor. Ten more cities – including Salt Lake City – used RCV when Utah held its elections on November 21.

And more voters want to join them. Three cities in Michigan voted to adopt RCV for the first time, while Minnetonka, MN and Easthampton, MA voted to keep or expand it. With these victories, RCV has won 27 city ballot measures in a row.

This is a massive change from just seven years ago, when only ten cities used RCV. Now, 51 places use RCV, home to roughly 16 million Americans. That includes two states (Alaska and Maine) and 49 counties and states, with more states and cities – including Oregon, Nevada, and the District of Columbia – slated to vote on the use of RCV next year.

Poll after poll tells us that Americans see our current politics as toxic, divisive, and unresponsive to voters. An Associated Press poll this summer told us that just one in ten Americans feel our democracy is working very well. A Pew Research study this September found a staggering 63% have little to no confidence in the future of the U.S. political system.

Compare that with ranked choice voting, which tackles these problems and is popular everywhere it’s used.

Here’s how it works: In races with more than two candidates, voters are asked to rank the candidates in order of preference – first choice, second choice, and so on. If no candidate earns more than 50% of first choices, an “instant runoff” occurs. If your favorite candidate is eliminated, your vote counts for your highest-ranked choice who has a chance to win.

RCV can change our politics by giving voters better choices, better representation, and more positive campaigns. Voters are able to express their true preferences, without playing “spoiler” or “wasting” their vote on a candidate who can’t win. At the same time, candidates are forced to appeal to a broad coalition of voters – even those who rank another candidate Number 1 – to build the majority they need to win.

The movement for RCV is both bottom-up and top-down – citizens and local legislators are winning RCV city by city (including the five this November), showing that change is possible amidst gridlock. At the same time, pro-RCV efforts are moving in Congress. Just this week, Colorado Senator Michael Bennet introduced the Voter Choice Act, which would provide funding for cities, counties, and states to implement RCV.

Yet Election Day 2023 didn’t just show that voters want RCV; it also demonstrated how RCV can deliver better campaigns and more representative and responsive governance.

Look at Boulder and Portland, Maine’s hotly contested mayoral elections. In Portland, two losing candidates swiftly congratulated the winner with each calling the race “amazing”; the mayor-elect praised a “civil” campaign that’s “what this city deserves.” In Boulder’s first use of RCV, the two leading candidates drew clear policy distinctions, but the losing candidate quickly conceded and said that “the city’s in great shape” under his opponent’s leadership.

It’s not just nicer campaigns – by empowering start-up candidates to run instead of “waiting their turn,” RCV has led to more representative bodies of leaders. On Election Day, St. Paul, MN elected its first all-female city council; all are also under 40 and six out of seven are people of color. Cities like New York and Las Cruces, NM have also elected their first majority- or all-female councils using RCV; Minneapolis and Salt Lake City have elected their first majority people-of-color councils.

Of course, RCV doesn’t favor one demographic or ideological group – but by lowering the barrier to entry for underrepresented candidates, it gets us closer to elected bodies that look like the people they serve.

Ultimately, at a time when most Americans feel that our political system isn’t working as it should, RCV is offering glimmers of hope. That’s a 2023 election story that we can all be excited about – and one that sets the stage for even more wins for RCV in 2024.


Read More

Woman holding out an empty wallet at a table.

Many Americans wrongly associate poverty primarily with Black and Hispanic communities. Explore how this misconception influences public opinion, politics, and anti-poverty policy.

skaman306 / Getty Images

More Whites Live in Poverty than Either Blacks or Hispanics - Correcting the Perception of Poverty

From observing people and politicians over the years—I can find no data on this—I have the impression that liberals as well as conservatives think that the typical person living in poverty is Black or Hispanic. The image most Whites have of people of color is someone who is poor—except for celebrities—with little education; they are not aware of many people of color who are middle class. On the other hand, they are not aware of many Whites who are poor and so they think their number is low.

Why is the perception of poverty important? The perception of who is poor has significant impact on the support for government programs that aid the poor. Given the extent of racism in this country, whether subtle or violent, (see my post, “Whether the Issue is Gun Violence or Inequality, It Always Comes Back to Race/Racism”), it’s not surprising that support for anti-poverty programs is non-existent among MAGA Republicans and for that matter has always been weak among Republicans; 45% of Republicans would even cut food stamp support. Their attitude is "it's your fault;" so government has no responsibility to help. They feel the causes of poverty are personal: bad life choices, drugs, lack of work ethic, and the breakdown of families—all negative perceptions of Black culture.

Keep ReadingShow less
The All-America City of San Antonio Collaborates to Address Teen Pregnancy and Other Issues
person in green pants sitting on white textile
Photo by Vanessa on Unsplash

The All-America City of San Antonio Collaborates to Address Teen Pregnancy and Other Issues

San Antonio, TX, has been working to reduce teen pregnancy for over two decades, making considerable progress through collaborations among the city, county, nonprofit organizations, and the University of Texas. A nine-time All-America City, one of San Antonio’s key community collaborations, SA 2020, harnessed civic muscle to create and achieve dozens of measurable goals, including a significant reduction in teen pregnancy.

The San Antonio Teen Pregnancy Collaborative (SATPPC) was formed in 2010 in response to news that Bexar County had one of the highest rates of teen births in the United States. The SATPPC brought together an impressive list of cross-sector organizations, including public entities, community-based organizations, and faith-based and secular institutions. The group’s overall goal was to reduce the Bexar County teen birth rate among females ages 15 to 19 by 15% by 2020, and it exceeded this goal even before that date.

Keep ReadingShow less
Anti-gerrymandering sign

Anti-gerrymandering sign

Bill Clark/Getty Images

Don't Hold Your Breath Waiting for Politicians or Their Consultants to Fix Gerrymandering

2018, a nonprofit worker in Michigan named Katie Fahey posted a message online asking if anyone else was tired of politicians drawing their own districts. She had no campaign experience and no political base.

Within two years, the ballot initiative she built, called Voters Not Politicians, had written an independent redistricting commission into the Michigan constitution. Hollywood eventually made a documentary about it, Slay the Dragon, which is a fairly accurate description of what she had actually done.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red rock formations in the "Valley of the Gods."

Red rock formations in the "Valley of the Gods" on April 22, 2026 in Bears Ears National Monument, Utah. Bears Ears has been a controversial Monument since it's creation in December of 2016.

George Frey / Getty Images

When Public Lands Become Real Estate

Last week, in his latest attempted liquidation of our shared heritage, President Trump signed two executive orders eviscerating protections for close to three million acres of our national monuments: Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante. From the Oval Office, a president who has never even seen these sacred sites reduced them by roughly 90%, dwarfing his 2017 attempt at a similar land grab by about a million acres, leaving only 300,000 acres of protected land. These cuts will directly threaten critical wildlife habitats, put nearly 100,000 irreplaceable archaeological sites at risk of destruction, and fracture an interconnected indigenous homeland that has been stewarded by Native tribes since time immemorial. To Trump, it’s just another real estate deal.

The Trump regime has tried to portray this set-up to sell off as an effort to restore public access. During the Oval Office photo op where the president signed the proclamations, he said of the monuments: “You can’t go hunting. You can’t go fishing. You can’t do anything. You can virtually not even walk on it.” That is, to put it mildly, a malicious lie. All your favorite forms of outdoor recreation—from hiking and camping to fishing and hunting—are allowed there, which Trump might know if he had ever visited the land he decided is not worth preserving. In fact, the Antiquities Act doesn’t limit ordinary public use but rather the extent to which an area can be subject to mining and drilling. So much for the land of the free. Trump wants to make it a whole lot easier for extractive industries and private development interests to privatize and pillage these sacred lands for financial gain. Home of the brave? Not an ounce of courage to refuse the fuel lobby when it comes to our public lands. At least the law is on our side. As the President of the National Parks Conservation Association put it, this is both “a betrayal to the American people and illegal.”

Keep ReadingShow less