Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is a voting method that has gained popularity in recent years, but it continues to face criticism from some critics who question its effectiveness and fairness. RCV is used in multiple forms and in various states across the U.S. Alaska, Hawaii, and Maine are the three states that use RCV statewide, with Alaska and Maine using it for both federal and statewide elections. In Hawaii, RCV is used in certain statewide elections. Additionally, 13 states have localities that either currently use or are planning to use RCV in municipal elections. However, some states like Florida, Tennessee, South Dakota, Montana, and Idaho have passed measures prohibiting the use of RCV.
The most common form of RCV is known as instant-runoff voting, which has been tested in several states, with Alaska being the most notable example. Under this method, voters’ first choice is counted in the first round of vote counting. If no candidate reaches 50% of the vote, the candidate with the least number of first-choice votes is eliminated, and the second-choice candidates on those ballots are counted. This process is repeated until a candidate reaches the required 50% threshold.
AJ Simmons, research director of the Center for State Policy and Leadership at the University of Illinois Springfield, believes that more states and localities could adopt RCV in the future. He mentioned that Nevada is holding a referendum in November to adopt a similar system, and Idaho and Colorado might also vote on adopting RCV. Oregon is considering a system similar to Maine’s, while Utah is funding a pilot program to test RCV at the local level.
However, there are potential issues with RCV. One concern is “ballot exhaustion,” where voters choose not to fill out their ballot fully, and their votes are not utilized in further rounds once their preferred candidates are eliminated. Critics argue that this can lead to wasted votes. Another criticism is the potential partisan impact of RCV. While some argue that it can benefit moderate candidates, there is no conclusive evidence that it favors one party over another.
Alaska congressional candidate Nick Begich, a Republican, expressed his frustration with RCV, calling it a “disingenuous voting process.” He criticized the system for not allowing a traditional primary where each party can determine their best representative and contrast their ideas in a general election. He also pointed out that Democrats often run a single candidate in order to appeal to a broader electorate, while Republicans have multiple candidates representing different perspectives.
These concerns highlight the ongoing debate surrounding RCV and its impact on elections. While proponents argue that it promotes a broader set of candidates and enhances the chances of moderate candidates, critics question its fairness and potential partisan implications. As more states and localities consider adopting RCV, it remains to be seen how it will shape the future of American elections.
