It will take a while to truly see the effects of electing twelve city councilors in Portland, and equally long to assess the new mayor, Keith Wilson, and his approach to the city. However, we can directly see the effect ranked-choice voting has had on the electoral process in Portland and extrapolate what it could mean for the state and country at large. In my opinion, ranked-choice voting (RCV) is a brilliant way to rid ourselves of the almost unbridgeable divides in the country and state and find a way out of the two-party system.
For anyone unfamiliar with ranked-choice voting, it’s a system in which voters can rank, in order of preference, the multiple candidates they’re interested in. It’s also the fastest-growing election reform in this country, according to Deb Otis’ 2022 article “Ranked-Choice Voting Results in More Democratic Outcomes.” Indeed, in 2022, ten million voters used RCV across 53 cities and counties in Maine and Alaska. Now, in 2024, RCV was used in 60 jurisdictions across 24 states. This system of voting shifts the public away from the binary win-or-lose political system we currently suffer under, and allows for the opportunity to have a greater number of people and concerns represented in office.
This was made clearer than ever to me when I discovered that my parents and I—who couldn’t be more different politically—both ranked Keith Wilson in our mayoral ballots. It was in different orders of preference, but even still the fact that we now have a mayor that both of us could see some value in, rather than their first pick, Gonzalez, (who I didn’t rank at all) or mine, Rubio, (who they didn’t rank ) is personal testament to the effectiveness of RCV. Had the election primarily come down to those two candidates, one of us would have been heavily disappointed.
The current voting system fosters a “winner-takes-all” mentality, which only serves to drive wedges between political parties and among people who feel as though either all or none of their concerns will be addressed by whatever candidate makes it into office. An obvious example of traditional voting gone awry was the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. To me, a democracy is not a democracy when the majority is ignored in favor of an outdated and corrupt system built on slavery and voter suppression. This has happened a handful of times in US history, with another notable one being the 2000 election. Both elections resulted in massive, possibly seismic shifts in our country that some could argue we have not recovered from.
In his 2023 article, “Ranked choice is ‘the hot reform’ in democracy. Here’s what you should know about it“, Miles Parks asserts that “80% or more of Americans are concerned or feel there’s a threat to the U.S. democratic system.” RCV is a direct response to this concern, providing an incentive for politicians to appeal to broader voter bases since they now need more than simple plurality to win. Less extreme candidates mean less extreme policymaking means a happier, more democratic country. Parks also points out that RCV allows voters “to voice their true preferences, as opposed to settling.” Many, many people on the left feel that the last three elections have been run based on the lesser of two evils, rather than on a candidate they can wholeheartedly throw their support behind. Although I think the left tends to make the perfect the enemy of the good, I haven’t been thrilled by any of the candidates the DNC puts forth either and am frustrated with the corruption in the political system. RCV allows voters to support their preferred candidates without the fear that voting Green, Independent, Libertarian, etc., is essentially throwing away a vote and helping the opposing party win.
Further, according to Deb Otis’ article, RCV boosts voter turnout by eliminating the need for a run-off election, where voter turnout “typically declines by about 40%.” Thus more people’s votes and voices are taken into account initially, allowing for a more democratic princess from the get-go. Otis also quotes data that shows, “more women and candidates of color run in RCV elections compared to traditional ‘one choice’ elections.” Campaigns become more inclusive, diverse, and representative of greater swaths of the population.
This is not to say there aren’t valid criticisms of this system. Speaking anecdotally from conversations with friends and family, some have said that having so many choices could deter people from voting and that it’s confusing and time-consuming to sift through all those options on the ballot. This is a fair criticism; it took me close to three hours to research everyone in my district to make sure I was ranking the people I felt strongly about and not everyone has that time to spare. The percentages can get confusing, although I found this video circulated by The Oregonian which helpfully breaks down the process. Even in light of those difficulties, voters who use RCV have been repeatedly shown to strongly support it. A 2021 CBS News article, “Poll Finds New Yorkers ‘Overwhelmingly Support Ranked Choice Voting,” shows that more than 75% of those voters want to use ranked-choice voting again and 83% said the ballot was easy to fill out. A survey taken in 2004 after San Francisco first implemented RCV found that 86% of voters felt that the system was understandable, and, “a majority of respondents said they preferred it to the former system,” according to Adam Shanks’ 2024 article “How ranked-choice voting has played out in The City.” That’s a very old poll, but Shanks addresses this, writing, “San Francisco Department of Elections Director John Arntz said that while a study of voters’ confidence in the system in San Francisco has not been done in many years, The City has not seen any indication — such as an increase in ‘overvotes’ or abnormally high number of exhausted ballots — that voters have become increasingly baffled by ranked-choice voting.” Shanks goes on to cite a 2022 poll in Alaska, where “85% of voters reported finding ranked-choice voting to be ‘simple.'” Parks’ article addressed RCV in Alaska, saying, “Last year…the system worked. Voters there approved a move to a ranked-choice voting system in 2020, and the state used it in 2022 for its statewide races.” He quotes Deb Otis as saying, “‘While similar Republicans — Republicans who maybe bucked their party or appeared bipartisan or moderate like Liz Cheney — were getting knocked out in primaries…[Alaska voters] also elected Mary Peltola to the House, who is considered one of the most moderate Democrats in the House in a race that included a couple of real hardliners who would not be considered moderate by any definition.'”
I—like many others—am desperate for a shift away from our broken two-party system. I should not have had to choose between Trump and Biden in 2020; I should not have had to choose between a centrist America and a regressive one in this most recent election. I’m disappointed that Measure 117 was shot down since ranked-choice voting is truly the first meaningful step this country has taken away from the two-party system and toward a more genuine form of democracy, where there aren’t winners and losers, where the actual majority is represented, and where diversity of beliefs is more important than ideological dogmatism.
I encourage everyone to research further into the myriad resources available online about ranked-choice voting. Urge policymakers to consider implementing it to improve electoral representation and reduce the devastating polarization that wracks this country. Ranked-choice voting truly represents a step forward for democracy, which, in my opinion, is why attempts at large-scale voter reform have failed. It’s also why the Electoral College is still in full swing and has been largely unaddressed by policy-makers. In my opinion, both the DNC and GOP are worried by this movement, with good reason. (Republicans seem particularly threatened by it; they have led bans of RCV in Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Florida, more recently adding Kentucky, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama to that list since April 2024.) With so much power concentrated among a few small groups and diverted away from citizens, this might be our only chance at meaningful change in America. So, consider this article next time RCV comes around on the ballot at a state level, and let’s show the people in power that power is truly in the hands of the people.