Executive summary

The United States has used the same electoral system since its inception in 1787. However, as time has gone on and society has changed, public opinion has largely supported reform to the existing system in favor of something which provides more opportunities outside of a two-party system. The United States remains locked in a system which does not listen to the will of the people, especially in high-profile elections, leading to an erosion of faith in the political process. 

Overview

In recent years, close presidential elections have drawn increased media and public attention to the way elections are held in the United States, all the way from allegations of voter fraud to cries about the injustices of past elections. This brief does not focus on calls for reform of the Electoral College or voter identification, but rather how elections themselves are run and the rules that govern an individual’s ballot choices. Ranked choice voting is an increasingly popular system of elections. 

Ranked choice voting prioritizes majority rule, meaning a candidate must receive at least 50% of the vote in order to win. Under ranked choice voting, voters rank candidates according to their preference, from first to last. In the primaries, the top five vote-getters would move on to the general election. If a candidate in the general election receives more than 50% of all total votes, they are declared the winner. However, if no candidates pass that benchmark, the candidate with the fewest total first-choice votes is eliminated. The votes for the eliminated candidate are then redistributed to the next highest ranking candidate on their list. This process would continue until there is one candidate with more than 50% of the vote. Election reform is crucial, and ranked choice voting is one of the most popular ways that states have decided to attempt these necessary changes. 

Pointed Summary

• Fair elections are crucial to the survival of any democratic system as it proves the existence of a system that works with and listens to the people
• Currently, Americans are losing trust and faith in the United States electoral system
• According to recent polls, political parties are among the least trusted public governmental institutions in existence
• Past attempts at electoral reform have focused on the Electoral College and answers at the federal level
• State and more localized attempts at reform are more likely to pass given that these solutions are 
• Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis popularized the idea of laboratories for democracy to try out economic and social systems at smaller levels of government with no risks to the greater society to determine if they are viable 
• Laboratories for democracy work akin to the scientific method at lower levels of government like the state and local level because they are able to test out different types of electoral systems and ways of engaging in the democratic process

Relevance

Large numbers of people are calling for election reform and more options of people to vote for instead of the normal two party system and candidates. Ranked choice voting as an electoral system has been gaining increased popularity within the past few years. According to Miles Parks of NPR in 2023, more than fifty American voting areas have switched to ranked choice voting, making RCV “one of the political subplots” of this year's election cycle. However, even more importantly, according to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2018, nearly two-thirds of Americans state that “significant changes” are needed in how American government functions in modern times. To put it quite simply, Americans want a change in the way elections are held. 

‍

Not to mention, according to a Gallup News article written by Mary Claire Evans in 2024, given the tumultuous state of politics, a majority of Americans—58%—believe that a third party should be created within the United States. According to the Partnership for Public Service in 2024, three-quarters of respondents believe that the government as it stands is “corrupt”. There is increasing discontent with the two party system and belief that these two parties do not do a good enough job in helping the constituents they are supposed to serve. 

‍

Americans want a change in the way their political system functions, and ranked choice voting stands as an attractive option for many states. In fact, ranked choice voting oftentimes encourages voters to vote for more centrist candidates and trends away from electing candidates who are closer to the political extremes.

History

1. Current Stances

In an academic article written by Nathan Atkinson and Scott C. Ganz from NYU, they contend that ranked choice voting can mitigate extremism and weaken political divisions within society. In fact, they go as far as calling it a “panacea for extremism”.

However, ranked choice voting has been rather controversial for a number of reasons. In the most recent 2024 election cycle, ranked choice voting was on the ballot for a number of states. As Will Mantell from FairVote writes in 2024, the number of states who use ranked choice voting had the potential to triple at the end of the most recent election. Currently, both Maine and Alaska use ranked choice voting. Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, and Oregon all had ballot measures regarding adopting ranked choice voting this election. However, each of these states ended up rejecting the ballot measures to implement ranked choice voting. Even so, many cities elected to implement ranked choice voting into their local election systems. Most notably, the measure to adopt ranked choice voting passed in Washington, D.C. by a 46 point margin, which is important because D.C. is known as the ideological center of the United States’ democratic system. 

According to the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, ranked choice voting systems produce significantly lower levels of voter confidence, and it takes 12 seconds longer, per candidate, for individuals to vote in these systems. However, in a poll of Maine voters conducted for the same study, confidence in being able to fill out their ballots increased with experience. 

One positive result they found was that, in ranked choice voting election systems, there is a 5 percent greater likelihood of individuals voting for third party candidates than the normal two options. 

The National Civic League argues that ranked choice voting will strengthen the democratic process because it is more methodical and specific in capturing the preferences of each and every voter. Not to mention, vote redistribution means that voters get an active say in the final decision right up until a winner is called. As such, this also guards against radicalism because it means that candidates are now vying for, if not a first place voter, then a second or third choice. 

The majority of Americans want more options for political candidates. However, while some see ranked choice voting as an opportunity for a more democratic electioneering system, others see it as a confusing system that makes voting more difficult. 

Case Studies 

1. Maine

Maine became the very first state to use ranked choice voting in federal elections, such as those for the House of Representatives and the Senate. Maine has largely been seen as the state that’s been able to work with ranked choice voting the most successfully. In fact, as the Sightline Institute writes, Maine has found that ranked choice voting has encouraged less dramatic partisan politics, and candidates have been much more cordial to each other, allying with each other and reaching out to other candidates’ supporters. 

2. Alaska

Alaska has also been another prominent state to implement ranked choice voting systems. In fact, it is in part because of this electoral system that Alaska elected its very first Alaska Native member of Congress in Mary Peltola. This created a large amount of controversy in the state, as during the 2022 election—the very first in which they used ranked choice voting—two Republican candidates and a Democrat ran for office. Instead of one of the Republican candidates winning, candidate Sarah Palin played spoiler which meant losing the seat to Peltola. As a result of this, one of Alaska’s ballot measures in the 2024 election cycle was about repealing the ranked choice voting system in the state. As of right now, the decision for this ballot measure has been too close to call. 

3. San Francisco, California

San Francisco and Oakland, California have also adopted ranked choice voting for their local and city-wide elections and San Francisco has been using it since 2002. These cities are prime examples of local governments enacting policies that are different from the status quo in an attempt to live up to the ideal of these governments being ‘laboratories for democracy’. Though they have had largely good experiences with this voting system, there was an incident in 2020 in Oakland where the wrong candidate for  a school board position was sworn in and the Registrar of Voters only noticed until later that there had been an issue with the tabulation software. As such, in the adoption of ranked choice voting, election software must be of the highest quality when implemented. 

Policy Problem

A. Stakeholders

As per stakeholders in the ranked choice voting election process, every single American citizen who holds the right to vote has a stake. Democracy is meant to serve at the will of the people, and the way that elections are run is no different. The majority of citizens want change in the candidates who run for office, but the current system of elections under a plurality system with a single winner guarantees that two major parties will emerge. 

Of course, politicians are also an important stakeholder in these elections. If the way elections are run changes, that means that it could be more difficult for established candidates from national political parties to get elected or even re-elected. As the Nevada Independent writes, “It’s nearly unanimous: the political elite don’t like ranked choice voting.” As such, that means these individuals campaign incredibly hard against ballot measures in favor of changing election systems to favor different candidates. 

B. Risks of Indifference

The continuation of two party election systems could contribute to greater political polarization. This is incredibly bad for society. As exemplified through the most recent 2024 election cycle, political-related violence has intensified, with a perceived assassination attempt against a major-party candidate for the United States presidency. 

‍

As the Pew Research Center explains, Democrats and Republicans are more divided now than they were thirty years ago. 

As the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace writes, deeply entrenched political divides at the highest levels of politics has led to levels of legislative gridlock never before seen in the United States. To put it simply, United States politics has not been working for the people. Political polarization has also meant that everyday people are increasingly dividing amongst themselves, cutting off friends and family members that don’t share the same viewpoints, thereby creating an “us versus them” mentality. 

This is dangerous as it creates a less inclusive and American society. The risks of indifference for not attempting to implement new ways of thinking for the United States’ electoral system is too great to ignore. 

C. Nonpartisan Reasoning

Democracy is the guiding principle by which the entire United States of America is founded upon. As such, the will of the people is paramount, and so should the ability for their will to be clearly expressed, especially during an election. This is exactly what ranked choice voting provides. The most crucial aspect of ranked choice voting is that it operates by requiring a majority vote. Currently, most elections in the United States only require that a candidate receive a plurality of votes, or more than any other candidate. If a candidate must receive at least 50% of the votes in order to win, it ensures that a majority of voters actually elected that candidate, rather than a potential “tyranny of the minority”.

Additionally, ranked choice voting reduces the “spoiler effect”, which occurs when votes for a third party candidate are typically seen as an individual “throwing away” their vote because that third party candidate typically has no chance of winning. Ranked choice voting eliminates the spoiler effect because now, even if an individual votes for someone who is typically seen as a “wasted” vote, that vote can be redistributed later if they don’t reach a majority of the available votes. 

Given both of these facts, it’s likely that ranked choice voting increases voter turnout. This is because not only does it provide voters with more of a choice in who their representatives are, but it also gives voters more belief that their individual vote matters and makes a difference. In fact, one study found that ranked choice voting increases probabilities of voter turnout in areas that use this electioneering system rather than those that don’t. This is critical as voter turnout in the most recent 2024 election only reached 65 percent, a decline from the last presidential election. 

Policy Options

1. Laboratories for Democracy

“Laboratories for democracy” are important tools for forming a more just democracy. The United States is naturally opposed to change. As such, changing something as fundamental to democracy as the electoral process itself is a tough ask for many. However, local implementation would work the most effectively. City councils and county commissioners can move toward enacting ranked choice voting at the lower levels of government first as a way to expose voters to this new electoral process. Then, if it is successful, it can be implemented at the state level. It can be difficult to make strong, fervent policy recommendations without it being implemented in practice, so using states as “laboratories for democracy” will encourage states to try different forms of electoral systems. This can be implemented through campaigns across localities to change to ranked choice voting systems within their area. According to Ballotpedia, it costs an average of $14.87 to get one required signature for a ballot measure, so depending on the amount of signatures required to get a proposition on a city election’s ballot, this could, in fact, be incredibly expensive to implement. Or, if it’s raised as a pertinent concern to the already elected officials, it may be something local governments can implement without a ballot measure. 

2. Investment in Voter Education

Another way to improve trust in elections is by greater investment in voter education. According to the United Nations, voter education can be crucial in helping underrepresented groups in actually getting to the polls and having their voices heard. One of the main arguments against ranked choice voting is that it will create confusion amongst the electorate. However, voter education in regards to ranked choice voting is crucial because it helps the public understand how ranked choice voting works. 

Currently, political action committees (PACs) and corporations spend large sums of money in aiding voters. However, the amount of federal funding that states receive for the same work is much lower in comparison. Voting is a cornerstone of democracy, so the federal government should invest more funds into educating the electorate to ensure that they are making the best possible decisions for themselves and what is important to them. So, in order to do this, the federal government could start taxing political parties by a certain percentage of the money they raise over $50 million dollars toward providing important, nonpartisan information to voters. In August of 2024, the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee spent more than $300 million dollars on their presidential campaigns. If the federal government taxed even just a singular percentage of that money, that would raise over $6 million dollars that could be spent on voter education. By implementing a fair and standardized taxing system on political party committees, the federal government would be well positioned to allocate that funding toward greater voter education. 

Conclusions

In conclusion, addressing decreased trust in the electoral process, an increasing desire for third parties, and a trustworthy implementation of ranked choice voting requires a multifaceted approach, but a specific solution stands out: small-scale local government implementation and a political party tax on campaigns that raise more than $50 million dollars. 

Acknowledgment

The Institute for Youth in Policy wishes to acknowledge Gwen Singer, Mason Carlisle, Lilly Kurtz, Paul Kramer. and other contributors for developing and maintaining the Fellowship Program within the Institute.

Work Cited

1. Allen, J. (2024, February 13). The functions of political parties: How much should we trust political parties?. Protect Democracy. https://protectdemocracy.org/work/how-much-should-we-trust-political-parties/ 
2. Greve, M. (2001, March 31). Laboratories of Democracy. American Enterprise Institute - AEI. https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/laboratories-of-democracy/ 
3. Parks, M. (2023, December 13). Ranked choice is “the hot reform” in democracy. here’s what you should know about it. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2023/12/13/1214199019/ranked-choice-voting-explainer 
4. Oliphant, B. (2018, April 26). The public, the political system and American democracy. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/04/26/the-public-the-political-system-and-american-democracy/ 
5. Evans, M. C. (2024, November 7). Support for a third political party in the U.S. dips to 58%. Gallup.com. https://news.gallup.com/poll/651278/support-third-political-party-dips.aspx 
6. Partnership for Public Service. (2024, July 24). The State of Public Trust in Government 2024. https://ourpublicservice.org/publications/state-of-trust-in-government-2024/ 
7. Atkinson, N., & Ganz, S. C. (2023, September 5). Ranked choice voting and political polarization. NYU Law. https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/Atkinson%20and%20Ganz%20Ranked_Choice_Voting_and_Political_Polarization.pdf 
8. Clark, J., DeSoi, C., & Williams, J. (2021, March 18). The effect of ranked-choice voting in Maine. The Effect of Ranked-Choice Voting in Maine | MIT Election Lab. https://electionlab.mit.edu/articles/effect-ranked-choice-voting-maine 
9. National Civic League. (2022, December 30). Advancing democracy: Ranked-choice voting. https://www.nationalcivicleague.org/advancing-democracy-ranked-choice-voting/ 
10. Mantell, W. (2024, November 7). Statement: Ranked choice voting on Election Day 2024. FairVote. https://fairvote.org/press/statement-ranked-choice-voting-on-election-day-2024/ 
11. Clark, J., DeSoi, C., & Williams, J. (2021, March 18). The effect of ranked-choice voting in Maine. The Effect of Ranked-Choice Voting in Maine | MIT Election Lab. https://electionlab.mit.edu/articles/effect-ranked-choice-voting-maine 
12. Grimes, S. (2024, September 24). Maine’s lessons in ranked choice voting. Sightline Institute. https://www.sightline.org/2024/09/13/maines-lessons-in-ranked-choice-voting/ 
13. Klint, C. (2023, October 14). Mary Peltola makes history as first Alaska native sworn into Congress. Alaska Public Media. https://alaskapublic.org/2022/09/13/mary-peltola-makes-history-as-first-alaska-native-person-sworn-into-congress/ 
14. OpaVote. (n.d.). San Francisco RCV Rules. https://opavote.com/methods/san-francisco-rcv-rules 
15. Whitsell, P. (2024, October 18). California’s real-life experience with ranked choice voting. Western News. https://thewesternnews.com/news/2024/oct/18/californias-real-life-experience-with-ranked-choice-voting/ 
16. Schaus, M. (2024, September 29). Opinion: It’s nearly unanimous: The Political Elite Don’t like ranked-choice voting  . The Nevada Independent. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/opinion-its-nearly-unanimous-the-political-elite-dont-like-ranked-choice-voting 
17. Geiger, A. (2014, June 12). Political polarization in the American public. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/ 
18. McCoy, J., & Press, B. (2022, January 18). What happens when democracies become perniciously polarized?. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2022/01/what-happens-when-democracies-become-perniciously-polarized?lang=en 
19. Dowling, E., Tolbert, C., Micatka, N., & Donovan, T. (2024, June 8). Does ranked choice voting increase voter turnout and mobilization?. Electoral Studies. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026137942400074X 
20. Staff, F. (2024, November 7). How did voter turnout compare?. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/projects/2024-us-president-election-live-updates-harris-trump/?article_anchor=us-presidential-election-2024-voter-turnout-comparison 
21. Ballot measures cost per required signatures analysis. Ballotpedia. (n.d.). https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_measures_cost_per_required_signatures_analysis 
22. United Nations. (n.d.). Chapter 5. United Nations. https://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/wps/publication/Chapter5.htm 
23. Funding by State. U.S. Election Assistance Commission. (2023, May 4). https://www.eac.gov/funding-levels-by-state 
24. Cloutier, J. (2024, October 3). National Party committees ramp up fundraising and spending as the 2024 election cycle enters home stretch. OpenSecrets News. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/10/dnc-rnc-national-party-committees-ramp-up-fundraising-and-spending-2024-election-cycle/ 

‍