Leading up to Election Day, numerous enthusiastic activists from all corners of the country convened via an online gathering, hailing the unmatched amount of state ballot initiatives set to alter the voting process. However, a wave of disappointment swept over these activists when the results rolled in – the move towards unconventional voting mechanisms was largely defeated across various states, regardless of their predominant political leanings.
These alternative mechanisms included open primaries, which allow candidates from all political parties to be on the same ballot, and ranked choice voting that lets people rank candidates in order of preference. These propositions, despite their seemingly logical approach, were met with rejection in states of all political colors: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and South Dakota.
In the proposed open primary system, a selection of top candidates would have been able to advance to the general elections irrespective of their party affiliations. As for the ranked-choice voting system, it was designed so that if no single candidate received a majority of first-place votes, those candidates at the bottom of the table would be eliminated and their votes would be reassigned according to the voters’ listed preferences.
Despite an incredible funding drive – approximately $110 million was raised by the election reform advocates, trouncing their adversaries’ funding – the financial dominance wasn’t sufficient to win over the electorate. The closing numbers could still increase as the post-election financial reports take shape.
In the wake of this year’s failures, the reformists looked back to their past victories in Alaska for solace. In 2020, Alaskans had endorsed a fusion of both open primaries and ranked choice voting with a slim margin. They had hoped to replicate this success, with Nevada voters giving initial approval to a similar measure in 2022.
Sadly, the tide turned this year and Nevada voters backtracked on their earlier endorsement of the progressive voting reform. In Alaska too, an attempt to repeal the combined open primaries and ranked choice voting system came agonizingly close to passing, with almost half the voters supporting it, at 49.9%.
Even though these reform modes might be viewed with skepticism in most states, variations of ranked choice voting are in practice for federal elections in Maine and about 50 counties or cities nationwide. This November, Washington D.C., and the Chicago suburb of Oak Park, Illinois, embraced the concept, while voters from Bloomington, Minnesota, reinforced their continued use of it.
Available data paints a clear picture – ranked choice voting doesn’t significantly alter the results that would otherwise come from conventional elections where a candidate wins through a plurality, rather than a majority. In fact, the ranking system was only required in 30% of scenarios as most were clear victories with candidates receiving the majority of initial votes.
In National perspective, only three candidates who initially lagged in first-place votes managed to turn the tables and end up victorious after ranked vote tabulations – one was for Portland City Council and the others vying for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. The San Francisco victory was of two progressive candidates who masterminded a strategy of urging voters to rank them first and second.
Initially, they were behind a moderate candidate who, had it been a traditional election, would have emerged as the winner. However, after six rounds of ranking, one of the progressive candidates was declared the victor when the other bowed out and their supporters’ votes were rerouted their way. Ranked choice voting advocates view this as a triumph as it prevented a split vote that could have led to both candidates losing.
Portland, Oregon, is another case where ranked choice voting was given its maiden run this November for mayoral and City Council elections. Meanwhile, the Oregon voters disposed of a proposal aiming to usher in the system for federal and statewide offices – a clear rejection of the reform.
In the Portland mayoral race, which comprised of as many as 19 candidates, Keith Wilson, a political novice, managed to clinch victory after 19 rounds of ranked tabulations were conducted. Despite this, there was a significant fraction of voters who opted not to participate in this new way of voting – around one in seven left the mayoral ballot blank, while a fifth of voters skipped the council races.
Detractors of ranked-choice voting believe that its complex nature discourages some voters from participating in elections. The academic studies also provide weight to these arguments, with reports suggesting that ranked-choice voting fails to enhance political decorum, reduce polarized viewpoints, or promote greater participation among black voters.
Despite the letdowns, the organizations that funded this year’s election reform initiatives are far from accepting defeat. Instead, they plan to reassess their strategies. One idea under consideration is to separate the open primary from the ranked-choice voting initiatives, and to change their focus towards smaller, more incremental modifications that could be implemented by state legislatures as opposed to reaching for large-scale constitutional amendments.
There is also a growing realization among the supporters that the initiatives might have been rushed, relying heavily on ad campaigns rather than building robust support from grassroots level. Remaining undeterred, these advocates are currently diving into voter surveys and focus group data in order to reshape their strategies.
A rather revealing insight drawn from this episode is the broader voter preference to stick to established voting mechanisms. This could be interpreted as a strong endorsement of traditional candidates who uphold established party values, casting aside outside-the-box candidates often presented by the Democrats. Interestingly, it is the Democrats who continually strive for these voting reforms, possibly hinting their lack of confidence in their own candidates to succeed in conventional formats.