Is ranked choice voting the future?

Ranked-choice voting (RCV) has gained traction as an alternative to traditional plurality voting systems in the United States. By allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference, RCV aims to ensure that elected officials have broader support and to address issues like vote splitting and the "spoiler effect." However, its implementation presents both advantages and challenges that merit careful consideration.

How Ranked-Choice Voting Works

In an RCV system, voters rank candidates by preference: first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on. If a candidate receives more than 50% of first-choice votes, they are declared the winner. If no candidate achieves this majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed to the remaining candidates based on voters' next preferences. This process continues until a candidate secures a majority.

For instance, in a five-candidate race, if no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who selected this eliminated candidate as their first choice have their votes reassigned to their next-highest-ranked candidate. This iterative process ensures that the winning candidate has broader support than in a traditional plurality system.

Advantages of Ranked-Choice Voting

One of the primary benefits of RCV is that it can lead to more representative outcomes. In traditional plurality elections, a candidate can win with less than a majority if the opposition is divided. RCV mitigates this by ensuring that the winner has majority support, reflecting a more accurate representation of the electorate's preferences.

Additionally, RCV can reduce the impact of third-party candidates acting as spoilers. In the 2000 U.S. presidential election, for example, Ralph Nader's candidacy is believed to have siphoned votes from Al Gore, contributing to George W. Bush's victory. Under RCV, voters could have ranked Nader first and Gore second, ensuring their vote contributed to their preferred major candidate.

Moreover, RCV encourages more civil campaigning. Since candidates aim to be the second or third choice of their opponents' supporters, they are incentivized to focus on policy issues rather than resorting to negative attacks. This shift can lead to more substantive debates and a healthier political discourse.

Challenges of Ranked-Choice Voting

Despite its advantages, RCV is not without its challenges. One significant concern is voter confusion. A study published in Social Science Quarterly found that 16% of voters felt confused by RCV, with Hispanic voters being more likely to report confusion than white voters. Confused voters were also less likely to rank multiple candidates and had lower confidence in the accuracy of ballot counting. This confusion can lead to incomplete ballots and undermine the effectiveness of the system.

Ballot exhaustion is another issue associated with RCV. This occurs when a voter's ballot becomes ineligible to be counted because all their ranked candidates have been eliminated. Factors contributing to ballot exhaustion include voters choosing not to rank all candidates, strategic truncation, or jurisdictions imposing limits on the number of preferences voters can express. For example, in Minneapolis, the city limits voters to ranking three candidates, which can lead to ballot exhaustion if a voter's top choices are eliminated early.

The implementation of RCV also presents logistical challenges. Adopting RCV requires changes to ballot design, vote-counting procedures, and voter education efforts. These changes can be costly and time-consuming, particularly for jurisdictions with limited resources. For instance, when New York City implemented RCV for its 2021 mayoral election, it took several days to determine a winner due to the complexity of the counting process.

Adoption and Impact of Ranked-Choice Voting

RCV has been adopted in various jurisdictions across the United States. Maine became the first state to use RCV for congressional elections in 2018. In the 2022 special election for Alaska's at-large congressional seat, Mary Peltola, a Democrat, defeated Sarah Palin and Nick Begich using RCV. This outcome was seen as a victory for moderate candidates, as Peltola secured a majority through the redistribution of votes from eliminated candidates.

In New York City, RCV was implemented for municipal elections in 2021. The adoption of RCV led to a more consensus-driven outcome, with candidates building coalitions and seeking broader appeal rather than simply attacking their opponents. Voter turnout also increased, with nearly 90% of city voters ranking more than one candidate in at least one race in their primary ballot.

However, not all attempts to implement RCV have been successful. In 2024, voters in Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, and Oregon rejected ballot measures that would have adopted RCV for packed races. In Missouri, voters approved a ballot measure banning the approach statewide and locally, except for a grandfather clause for St. Louis municipal elections. These setbacks highlight the challenges of implementing RCV and the need for effective voter education and outreach.

Conclusion

Ranked-choice voting offers a promising alternative to traditional plurality voting systems by ensuring that elected officials have majority support and by encouraging more civil campaigning. However, its implementation presents challenges, including voter confusion, ballot exhaustion, and logistical complexities. As more jurisdictions consider adopting RCV, it is crucial to address these issues through comprehensive voter education, thoughtful implementation strategies, and ongoing evaluation to ensure that RCV fulfills its promise of enhancing democratic representation.