Electoral Reform: Can Ranked Choice Voting Save Democracy?

 

In recent years, the idea of electoral reform has gained traction around the world — especially in the United States. One reform in particular — Ranked‑Choice Voting (RCV) — is frequently discussed as a way to strengthen democratic systems that many people feel have become overly polarized, unrepresentative, and antiquated. But can this voting method genuinely “save democracy” — or is it just another reform fad?

What Is Ranked‑Choice Voting?

Ranked‑Choice Voting is an alternative electoral system in which voters rank candidates by preference — first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on — instead of selecting just one. If no candidate wins a clear majority of first‑choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and those ballots are redistributed to the voters’ next choices. This process continues until one candidate has a majority.

Why Advocates Think RCV Strengthens Democracy

Proponents of RCV argue that it offers several democratic benefits — many of them directly aimed at addressing problems in modern elections:

Ensures Broad Majority Support

Unlike winner‑take‑all systems in which a candidate can win with a small plurality (e.g., 35 % of the vote), RCV ensures the eventual winner has majority support — at least among remaining ballots — even if that support comes through second or third preferences.

 Reduces the “Spoiler Effect”

RCV allows voters to honestly support their preferred candidate without worrying that their vote will help elect their least preferred candidate. That lowers the fear of “wasting” a vote on a less popular choice and can open the field for more diverse candidates.

 Encourages More Civil Campaigning

Because candidates want not just first‑choice votes but also second and third rankings, they are incentivized to campaign more broadly and avoid negative attacks. Research and local experience suggest this can reduce polarization and encourage outreach to more communities.

 Can Expand Representation

Some studies and ballot campaigns have shown that communities of colour and younger voters tend to support RCV more than older voters, suggesting the system might help broaden democratic participation among groups that feel marginalized under traditional voting systems. #

Challenges and Criticisms

Despite these potential upsides, ranked‑choice voting is far from universally accepted — and reform advocates acknowledge its limitations:

 Complexity and Voter Confusion

Critics argue that ranking candidates is inherently more complicated than simply selecting one, potentially confusing voters and increasing the number of spoiled ballots. This issue is especially acute without strong voter education campaigns.

 Ballot Exhaustion

If voters rank only a few candidates and all their choices are eliminated early, their ballot may not be counted in the final round, effectively “exhausting” their vote. Critics see this as disenfranchisement, though proponents say better education can mitigate it.

 Delay in Results

Because RCV requires additional rounds of counting — sometimes unprecedented in jurisdictions new to the method — results can be delayed compared with simple plurality systems, which can erode public trust if not handled transparently.

 It Isn’t a Cure‑All

Some political scientists note that RCV does not automatically fix structural issues like gerrymandering, campaign finance influence, or the dominance of major political parties. These problems require broader systemic reforms beyond just how votes are counted.

Real‑World Experiences: Mixed Results

Jurisdictions that have implemented RCV offer real‑world case studies. Cities like San Francisco have used ranked‑choice voting for local elections for decades. Maine and Alaska have adopted RCV for statewide elections, and Washington, D.C., is planning to use it starting in 2026 — alongside concerted voter education efforts from election officials.

Yet in the 2024 election cycle, several statewide ballot measures to adopt RCV failed — including in Oregon, Colorado, Nevada, and others — and Missouri even passed a constitutional ban against it. These outcomes suggest that voters remain skeptical or confused about the reform even as reform advocates push forward.

So, Can Ranked‑Choice Voting “Save Democracy”?

The short answer: Not by itself. Ranked‑Choice Voting is neither a magic bullet nor a threat to democratic integrity. Instead, it’s a tool — one that can improve representativeness and voter satisfaction in some contexts, but also a system that demands careful implementation, robust voter education, and broader structural reforms to realize its full potential.

In an era where many voters feel disconnected from the two‑party system and frustrated by negative campaigning and polarization, RCV offers a promising alternative — if it’s adopted thoughtfully and as part of a larger push to strengthen democratic norms and institutions.