RCV lets you rank candidates in order of preference. Instead of settling for one, you can vote for candidates you really like. If none get more than 50% of the first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is out, and those votes go to voters’ next choices. This continues like an instant runoff until someone wins a majority.
Benefits of Ranked-Choice Voting
- Reducing Polarization: RCV makes candidates appeal to a wider audience. Since they might need second- or third-choice votes, there’s less negative campaigning and more focus on real issues and solutions.
- Increasing Voter Turnout: With RCV, voters have more meaningful choices, which has led to higher engagement and turnout in states like Maine and cities like NYC. People are more likely to vote when they feel their vote counts and they don’t feel stuck choosing the lesser of two evils.
- Mitigating the Spoiler Effect: Currently, voting third-party can sometimes help the candidate you like least. RCV fixes this by letting your vote go to your next choice if your top pick is out.
- Enhancing Representation: RCV ensures elected officials have broader support. Candidates need to build coalitions and appeal to more voters, leading to more representative and responsive governance.
- Working Together: RCV helps representatives work together instead of just blocking each other to score political points. When candidates need to appeal to a wider range of voters, they’re more likely to find common ground and team up on policies that benefit everyone. This means popular policies are much more likely to happen.
Addressing Common Concerns
- Complexity: Some say RCV is too complicated. But it’s pretty intuitive. Ranking candidates is like choosing your favorite ice cream flavors or sports teams. Voters in places with RCV have adapted quickly and find it easy to use.
- Exhausted Ballots: Critics worry about “exhausted ballots,” where all a voter’s choices are eliminated before a winner is found. But this is no worse than voting third-party in our current system. RCV actually gives voters a better chance of having their preferences counted.
- Reporting Results: Another concern is that RCV might delay election results. While it might take a little longer for the media to declare a winner, the trade-off is a more accurate reflection of voter preferences. As the saying goes, “You can have something good, or you can have something fast, but you can’t have both.” Isn’t it time we prioritized accuracy in our elections?
- Historical Precedent: Some think RCV is new and untested. But it has a long history. RCV was used by five Ohio cities last century, including Cincinnati from 1925 to 1957 – before corrupt party bosses aligned with the KKK repealed RCV because it was too effective at giving voters fair representation.
The Opposition to RCV
It’s important to recognize that opposition to RCV often comes from those who benefit from the status quo. Incumbent politicians and entrenched interests may resist RCV because it threatens their hold on power. By giving voters more choices and making elections more competitive, RCV empowers voters and challenges the dominance of established political forces.
Find out more at RankTheVoteOhio.org.
Denise Riley is the Executive Director of Rank The Vote Ohio.
About the Author