States Will Choose Whether To Adopt or Abandon Ranked Choice Voting

There are any number of reasons to support or oppose a switch to ranked choice voting, but most of the opposition comes from the majority parties.

For those of us who actually vote, the process can be dispiriting. It often involves waiting in long lines on a weekday at some random schoolhouse or decommissioned train depot, just to cast a ballot for a candidate that chances are, you don't even particularly like—you just hate the other guy more.

Ranked choice voting could potentially help break up these doldrums. On a ranked choice ballot, instead of picking one candidate from a list, voters rank each candidate in order of preference. If one candidate wins an outright majority, then that person wins; if not, then the lowest-performing candidate is eliminated, and their ballots are re-tallied and allotted to whomever they picked as their second choice. This process repeats until one candidate passes 50 percent.

While ranked choice can't cure what's wrong with American politics, it can at least prevent the election of candidates without majoritarian support. It could also help potentially break up the two-party logjam by allowing people to vote for alternative candidates without worrying about acting as a spoiler—after all, if their desired candidate doesn't win, their vote will be re-tallied for whomever they would likely have settled for anyway.

The November elections represent an inflection point in the widespread adoption of ranked choice voting: Four states and Washington, D.C., will vote on whether to adopt such a system of their own. And of the two states that currently use ranked choice voting statewide, one will decide whether to abandon it.

Colorado

Some cities in the Centennial State already use ranked choice voting, most prominently Boulder. Proposition 131 would implement ranked choice statewide for U.S. senator and representative, state senator and representative, governor, lieutenant governor, and certain other state offices.

Currently, Colorado has partially closed primaries, open only to party members and unaffiliated voters—members of one party cannot participate in another party's primary. Proposition 131 would replace party primaries with "an all-candidate primary election featuring all candidates for those state and federal offices, with the final four candidates advancing to the general elections." On the general election ballot, "the voter may rank candidates in order of preference" and "may choose to rank as many or as few candidates for the covered offices…as the voter wishes, including ranking just one candidate per covered office." The votes would then be tallied and re-tallied as needed until one candidate achieved a majority.

The measure has attracted both supporters and detractors from each major political party. "Colorado has changed in the last 10 years," said former Colorado Republican Party Chair Dick Wadhams. "We went from a third…in the electorate to now, nearly 50% of the electorate are unaffiliated voters. They are rejecting both parties, and they're rejecting both parties because both parties are going to their extremes, both Republicans and Democrats."

Gov. Jared Polis (D) also endorsed the measure, writing on Facebook, "I think instant runoff voting is better than our current system because it gives voters more choices. I'm hopeful that if it passes it will encourage participation and improve our democracy."

Meanwhile, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R–Colo.) called ranked choice voting a "scheme" in a 2023 post on X and pledged, "I will oppose this effort to rig our electoral system in Colorado with everything I have." The Colorado Democratic Party voted this month to oppose the initiative. The Green Party of Colorado also opposes the measure, with party Co-Chair Patrick Dillon saying he supports ranked choice voting but opposes the measure's dissolution of closed primaries.

If passed, the measure would take effect on January 1, 2026, but a recent state law imposed preliminary requirements on the rollout of a ranked choice system that will likely delay implementation until at least 2028. Nonetheless, the measure is expected to pass, with a recent poll finding nearly 65 percent of likely voters planning or likely to vote "Yes."

Idaho

Much like in Colorado, Proposition 1 would "abolish Idaho's party primaries" and replace them with "a top-four primary and voters may vote on all candidates." The four with the highest vote counts will advance to the general election, which would use a ranked choice ballot.

"For the past 12 years, Idaho has had closed primary elections," notes an explainer video from Idahoans for Open Primaries. "Closed primaries block 270,000 independent voters from voting in the most important elections, and that's just not right. Elections are taxpayer funded, and when we're paying for it, we shouldn't be forced to pick a side to participate."

Republicans in the deep-red state are split on the issue. "Every registered voter should have the right to weigh in on choosing our leaders," former Gov. Butch Otter (R) said last year when endorsing the measure. "Independents, including a lot of military veterans, have been excluded from having their say because of the closed GOP primary."

Meanwhile, Idaho Republican Party Chairwoman Dorothy Moon called ranked choice voting "a pernicious plot to take away your ability to vote for conservative lawmakers."

"The blanket primary takes away your right to nominate your own candidates," she added. "Just as [Brigham Young University] doesn't get to decide who starts at quarterback for [Boise State University], neither should Democrats get to vote on who represents the Republican Party in the general election."

Nevada

Nevada Question 3 would amend the state constitution to "allow all Nevada voters the right to participate in open primary elections to choose candidates for the general election," at which point they would rank the top five candidates for each office. The covered races include most state offices, plus U.S. senator and representative.

Nevada currently uses closed primaries in which only party members can vote in primaries. "Voters registered to a minor party or not affiliated with a party may only vote for nonpartisan contests during a primary election," per the Nevada secretary of state. The state constitution also allows that "a plurality of votes given at an election by the people" shall constitute a victory, even without capturing a majority. Question 3 would eliminate party primaries, and the ranked choice ballot would force candidates to achieve a majority to win an election.

Nevada's proposal differs from most others on this list in that it institutes a top-five ballot instead of a top-four. It also has one of the fastest turnaround times: If adopted, the measure would go into effect by July 1, 2025, in time for the 2026 midterm elections.

Another way in which it differs from other states is that in Nevada, it's largely Democrats who oppose the initiative. "Enshrining this system in Nevada's state constitution would be a mistake because meaningful access to the ballot box is too critical to our system of representative government to sacrifice at the alter [sic] of an unproven and unwieldy experiment," state Assemblyman Steve Yeager (D–Las Vegas) told The Nevada Independent. Former Gov. Steve Sisolak and Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen—all Democrats—oppose the measure as well.

Oregon

In 2023, the Oregon Legislature passed a bill putting a ranked choice proposal on this year's ballot. If passed, Measure 117 would go into effect on January 1, 2028, after which both primary and general elections for state and federal office—including governor, U.S. senator or representative, and president—would be decided by a ranked choice vote. It would also require the secretary of state to "establish [a] program to educate voters about how ranked choice voting will be conducted."

Currently, both Benton and Multnomah Counties use ranked choice voting, as does the city of Portland. If enacted, Measure 117 would authorize all cities and counties, plus other local jurisdictions like school districts, to use it as well. The measure is supported by groups like the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon and multiple state chapters of the League of Women Voters.

On the other hand, some Oregon Republicans oppose the measure: "Ranked Choice voting introduces complexity into the process of determining a winner," state Rep. E. Werner Reschke (R–Klamath Falls) said in a 2023 memo. "After the 2016 and 2020 presidential election, one of the last things our election system needs is more skepticism by Oregonians."

It's ironic that Oregon Republicans would so forthrightly oppose the switch: According to the Cook Political Report, the state tilted 6 points more Democratic than the nation as a whole in 2022. But that same year, Gov. Tina Kotek (D) won office with only 47 percent of the vote; Christina Drazan, the Republican candidate, captured 43.6 percent and trailed Kotek by fewer than 67,000 votes. Independent candidate Betsy Johnson, meanwhile, got over 168,000 votes; on a ranked choice ballot, if enough of Johnson's voters had picked Drazan as their second choice, the state might have a Republican governor.

Washington, D.C.

Initiative 83 would implement ranked choice voting in the nation's capital "to allow voters to rank up to five candidates according to their preference in each contest for any office." While it would not get rid of party primaries, it would "permit any voter who is not registered with a political party to vote in the primary election of that voter's choosing for all offices."

The district is governed by a mayor and a 13-member city council; councilmembers are elected from each of the city's eight wards, while the other five are elected "at large." While the city overwhelmingly votes Democrat, federal law stipulates that the at-large members cannot all belong to the same political party. But as Colbert I. King wrote in The Washington Post, "Recent history is replete with examples of known Democrats who changed their party affiliation, registering as independents to run for those congressional set-asides."

Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, D.C. Democrats largely oppose Initiative 83. Mayor Muriel Bowser, for example, called ranked choice a "bad idea" and "not necessary." Charles Wilson, chair of the D.C. Democratic Party, told The Washington Post that allowing unaffiliated voters to participate in Democratic primaries would "dilute" the party's voice.

Alaska

The Yukon State is the outlier on this list: Alaska voters adopted ranked choice voting in 2020 and used it in the 2022 election cycle. But Ballot Measure 2 will let Alaskans vote on whether to scrap it altogether and bring back "a Political Party Primary and General Election Process that is easily understood."

Former Gov. Sarah Palin ran as a Republican in a 2022 special election to fill the state's sole congressional seat. Palin won the most votes in the primary but came up short in the general election: When none of the three candidates (a fourth competitor dropped out after the primary) cleared the hurdle of 50 percent, the votes were re-tallied. And even though Palin and another Republican, Nick Begich III, collectively captured 60 percent in the first round, only half of Begich's voters picked Palin as their second choice, while 30 percent picked Democratic candidate Mary Peltola. (The remaining 21 percent of Begich's voters picked no other candidates.) When the second round of votes were tallied, Peltola emerged victorious with 52 percent of the vote. Palin ran again in November to win the seat for a full two-year term, and again lost to Peltola when the ballots were re-counted.

Since then, Palin and other Republicans have blamed ranked choice voting for her loss. Sen. Tom Cotton (R–Ark.) called it "a scam to rig elections" and complained that even though "60% of Alaska voters voted for a Republican…a Democrat 'won.'" Palin had previously said ranked choice was so "bizarre" and "convoluted" that "it results in voter suppression."

But a January 2023 report from the R Street Institute found that in 2022, 90 percent of Alaskan incumbents won reelection, only slightly below that year's national average of 94 percent. And 85 percent of Alaskans polled said they found the system "somewhat simple" or "very simple."

"Alaska has been a success story for open primaries and ranked choice voting, and Ballot Measure 2 would be a major step backwards for Alaska voters," says Will Mantell, director of communications at FairVote, an organization that advocates for ranked choice voting. In 2022, "Alaska voters expressed their independent streak by electing a conservative Republican governor, a moderate Republican senator, and a moderate Democratic congresswoman."

What's Next?

Ranked choice, currently only used statewide by two states, could be adopted by as many as four more this year. "Any one of the four states considering" ranked choice voting "would become the most populous state to use it," says Mantell.

Interestingly, the measures are both supported and opposed in different states by different political parties and coalitions. And while there are a number of reasons for anyone to support or oppose a piece of legislation, it's especially notable that ranked choice voting is largely opposed by the majority parties: Democrats in Nevada and Washington, D.C., and Republicans in Idaho and Alaska, largely oppose ranked choice voting.

It's entirely possible that their opposition is genuine, but it certainly appears that firmly ensconced politicians simply don't want anything that would threaten their hold on power.