Ranked Choice Voting
The midterm elections of 2018 have sparked new interest in a process of voting for candidates known as ranked-choice voting (RCV).
An August 7 editorial in the Boston Globe asserts, “The Massachusetts legislature would be wise to adopt ranked-choice voting, coupled with a robust voter education campaign for statewide elections.” Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin has revealed that he is open to the idea of RCV. Some have suggested that RCV might be an appropriate issue for a ballot question. But why all of a sudden are we just now hearing about ranked-choice voting?
Interest is surging in Massachusetts because of two specific elections, one in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District and the other in Massachusetts’s 3rd Congressional District. Why Maine? In 2016, Maine became the first state to enact ranked-choice voting for statewide elections for governor, state legislature, and Congress. The state used RCV for the first time in November 2018 when the votes for the top two of four contenders in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District were too close to declare one a lawful victor. The process of RCV ultimately proved effective and efficient in determining the winner without resorting to a runoff.
Why is there now interest in the seat in the 3rd Massachusetts District, which Niki Tsongas held for a decade? There were ten individuals competing in the Democratic primary. Because of the distribution of votes among all ten, and since no candidate achieved a majority, a runoff was required for the top two. RCV would likely have resolved the election without a costly and time-consuming recount.
How does RCV work? Instead of picking just one candidate, ranked-choice voting allows you to rank the candidates on the ballot — as many or as few as you like — in your order of preference. If one person gets 50 percent of the vote, no further action is necessary. If no candidate gets 50 percent or more of first-choice votes, then the last-place candidate is eliminated and that candidate’s votes automatically get reallocated to the second choice listed on those ballots. RCV ensures that whoever wins has the support of the majority of voters and not just an electoral plurality.
Supporters believe that RCV frees voters from being pressured to choose between two or more preferences, and solves the problem of “spoiler” candidates who don’t actually reflect a majority of overall voter preference. According to Eric Maskin, a Nobel prize-winning Harvard economist, RCV gives all voters the opportunity to cast their vote according to their individual preference as well as a means to determine which candidate is most preferred by a majority of all votes cast. The method has been used by the Cambridge City Council since 1941 as well as in municipal elections in Memphis, San Francisco and Minneapolis and in parliamentary elections in Australia and Ireland, as well as in the recent midterm Congressional vote in Maine.
Closer to home, a nonprofit, nonpartisan advocacy organization, Voter Choice Massachusetts, is dedicated to educating the public and fostering legislative support for RCV. Supporters believe that RCV frees voters from being pressured to choose between two or more candidates, and solves the problem of “spoiler” candidates who don’t actually reflect a majority of overall voter preference.
Lincoln residents are proud of their grassroots politics, cherish their Town Meeting, and treasure their civic activism. On January 20, we in Lincoln have an opportunity to learn from a nonpartisan expert, Jim Henderson, board member of Voter Choice Massachusetts, the pros and cons of RCV and its relevance to Massachusetts. We hope you will join the discussion and help us all to reflect on the utility and value of RCV for statewide elections in Massachusetts on Sunday, Jan. 20 at 3 p.m. in Bemis Hall.
Sincerely,
Barbara Slayter and Gary Davis
Co-chairs, Lincoln Democratic Town Committee
