Ranked Choice Voting: A Comprehensive Look at the Controversial Election Method Expanding Across the United States

Ranked choice voting (RCV), also known as instant-runoff voting, is a voting method that has gained popularity in recent years and is used in various forms in a number of states across the United States. This method of voting operates normally in the first round, where only voters’ first choice is counted. However, if no candidate reaches 50% of the votes in the first round, then election officials begin counting the second choice candidates. The process involves eliminating the candidate with the least number of first-choice votes and tallying the second-choice candidate from those ballots, adding to the total tally of the other candidates. This process is repeated until a candidate in the race reaches the required 50% threshold.

The most popular form of RCV is instant-runoff voting, which has been tested in several states, most notably Alaska. In Alaska and Maine, RCV is used for both federal and statewide elections, while in Hawaii, it is used in certain statewide elections. Additionally, 13 states have localities that either use or are slated to begin using RCV in municipal elections. While 27 states do not have laws addressing the voting method, five states have passed measures prohibiting its use.

The adoption of RCV has been a contentious issue, with some arguing that it enhances the democratic process by allowing voters to rank their preferences in order of priority, while others claim it can lead to unintended consequences and lack of transparency.

One potential issue with RCV is “ballot exhaustion,” which occurs when voters choose not to fill out their ballot fully, and their votes are not utilized in further rounds once the candidates they did rank have been eliminated. However, it is important to note that voters in the traditional voting system also leave ballots blank or vote for candidates who have dropped out of the race by Election Day, meaning that their votes aren’t counted either.

Another complaint against RCV is its potential partisan impact on elections. The partisan impact of RCV may look different in different areas depending on which party loses more support to third-party candidates. For example, in an area where the Republican Party loses some support to the Libertarian Party, they may benefit from those Libertarian voters listing them as their second choice. The same is true with Democrats and the Green Party. However, there is no across-the-board evidence that RCV only benefits one party or another.

Moreover, RCV is likely to enhance a moderate candidate’s chances of being elected. By promoting more candidates with broad electoral appeal, a party may perform better electorally than they would otherwise. It’s also possible that candidates who are willing to ask supporters of other candidates in the race to rank them as an additional choice may benefit electorally from doing so, in comparison to candidates who choose not to do that.

Despite these potential benefits, some argue that RCV can lead to unintended consequences and lack of transparency. For example, in a multi-candidate race, it’s possible for a candidate to be eliminated in early rounds due to strategic voting, even if they have broad support among the electorate. Additionally, RCV can make it more difficult for voters to understand the implications of their votes, as they must rank candidates in order of preference rather than simply choosing one candidate.

Alaska congressional candidate Nick Begich, a Republican, described his frustrations with the “disingenuous voting process” of RCV in comments to Fox News. Begich is making another run for the state’s at-large congressional district after his defeat in the state’s 2022 midterm election, which used RCV. Begich argued that RCV allows a disciplined party to game the system and that it’s not what elections should be about. Instead, elections should be about who best represents their district.

Despite these criticisms, RCV continues to gain popularity in the United States, with more states and localities considering adopting it. In November 2023, Nevada held the second of two required referendums to adopt a similar system to what has been utilized in Alaska. Idaho and Colorado might also vote on adopting systems similar to the Alaska version of RCV, while Oregon is voting on a system that seems closer to how Maine has adopted it. Other states are also considering adopting some version of RCV, either the Alaska or Maine flavor for general elections or only in their primaries.

In conclusion, ranked choice voting is a controversial election method that has gained popularity in recent years and is used in various forms in a number of states across the United States. While some argue that it enhances the democratic process by allowing voters to rank their preferences in order of priority, others claim it can lead to unintended consequences and lack of transparency. Ultimately, the adoption of RCV is a complex issue that requires careful consideration of its potential benefits and drawbacks. As more states and localities consider adopting RCV, it’s important to continue the conversation about its implications for the democratic process and the future of elections in the United States.