Proponents of ranked-choice voting are reorienting themselves after Americans across the country largely rejected measures to implement the system.
It wasn’t all bad news for supporters of the voting method: A measure to abolish the system appears headed for failure in Alaska, where it was approved just four years ago. And in Washington, DC, voters approved ranked-choice voting.
But overall, election reform measures that would have instituted ranked-choice systems or eliminated partisan primaries — or in some cases both — had a bad night in November. Such measures failed on Election Day in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and South Dakota, prompting organizers to look for modern ways to expand their movement, such as educational efforts and action through state legislatures.
“We still see a lot of opportunity ahead of us,” said Deb Otis, director of research and policy at FairVote, a nonpartisan group that advocates for ranked-choice voting. “We know that the path to reform is not always straight. And the movement is still growing, but we will face obstacles at times.”
“Looking back, this was always going to be a difficult year for these types of ballot measures,” Otis added. “I think in a crowded presidential year that has sucked up a lot of oxygen, voters may have defaulted to a ‘no’ rejection of these new approaches to democracy reform.”
Nick Troiano, executive director of the election reform nonprofit Unite America, which advocates for open primary efforts, also attributed the losses to the unique presidential-level “rejection vote” this cycle — as well as spending by opponents of the measures to cast any doubts in the minds of voters to instill.”
Ranked choice systems currently exist in only two states nationwide: Alaska and Maine. Ranked-choice voting and open primary efforts accounted for 6 percent of ballot measures and 8 percent of contributions to ballot measures this cycle. according to an analysis by Ballotpedia shortly before election day. In Colorado, critics have spent almost half a million dollars They rejected the state’s proposal for an open top-four primary and ranked-choice general election — even though that amount was clearly a fraction of the $14.6 million spent on it. The Colorado Sun indicates this number more like $19 million.
Another factor that organizers cited for their losses in 2024 was voter confusion about what exactly the electoral reforms are proposing and how to fully participate when they are implemented.
“Given the confusion and the massive Trump vote, we have truly suffered defeat,” said Jim Jones, a former Idaho attorney general, former state Supreme Court justice and supporter of Idaho’s election reform proposal.
In the Gem State, one measure would have opened a top-four primary and instituted ranked-choice voting in the general election, but roughly 7 out of 10 Idahoans rejected it on election day.
Jones attributed some of the resistance to voters who may have been elated with nonpartisan primaries but feared a drastic shift to ranked-choice voting, which is the case Criticism drawn from national Republicans, including the president-elect, and Democrats alike. That could suggest that organizers will need to take smaller steps in the coming years, such as encouraging open primaries through state legislation.
“I think we’ll sort of evaluate our position, but I doubt we would try a ballot measure similar to this one,” Jones said of this year’s push.
In Colorado, advocates suffered another defeat when their ballot measure was rejected by voters. The measure would have required all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, to run for the same office on the same ballot. The top four finishers would go to the general election, where voters would rank them based on their choice.
Sean Hinga, Colorado legislative and policy director for the American Federation of State County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME), opposed the proposed ballot measure. He noted, “If you’re trying to pass a statewide voting measure that applies to governors and legislators, that’s just a different scenario than participating in a city election,” and said ranked-choice voting requires an “immense level” of voter education.
“I think most of the groups that opposed it were really concerned about the impact on voters, particularly voters of color and underserved communities, and whether we could see that it could be implemented without harming those communities, without that affecting voter engagement,” he noted.
However, there were some glowing spots for advocates. A ballot measure was passed in Washington, D.C., allowing independent voters to participate in both parties’ primaries and giving voters the opportunity to rate their top five candidates for office.
“Across our country, people are demanding more from their politicians, and that’s why tools like ranked-choice voting and systems where primaries let more people in and participate so that more people can participate in the democratic process – people are demanding these things,” said Lisa Rice, who led the effort to pass the D.C. measure.
The success of the initiative in DC – voters approved it by a whopping 73 percent — is particularly notable since the city is largely Democratic and the ballot measure was opposed by both the city’s Democratic Party and top officials such as Mayor Muriel Bowser (D).
Rice explained that her group managed to convince voters to pass it by explaining that despite D.C.’s blue leanings, independents represented a notable faction in the city. And she found that the primaries were actually funded by taxpayers, not at the expense of political parties.
“Many people didn’t understand that these were publicly financed elections. But when you say, ‘We all pay.’ ‘We should all be able to vote in the most consequential election in this city,’ a lot of people say, ‘Oh my God, that makes sense,'” Rice said.
Otis said the success in both D.C. and Alaska “reinforces the narrative that voters where they voted ranked choice voting like it.”
A proposed repeal of Alaska’s relatively modern ranked-choice voting system faces a recount. local outlets reported this week after the measure apparently failed by just one Fraction of a percentage point.
Otis is bullish about the possible path forward for election reforms in states where they lost this cycle. In Alaska, for example, voters rejected a ranked-choice voting initiative in 2002then approved the change nearly two decades later. But FairVote is now looking to the local level to make further progress.
“I would hope that the next statewide movement would come in a state where a number of voters already have it at the city level or have tried it for something like presidential primaries,” Otis said. “When we achieve a local victory, it does two great things: It makes for better local elections and also serves as a building block for greater victories in the future.”
Richard Pildes, a New York University law professor who did this advocated for states Following in Alaska’s footsteps highlighted the expansion of ranked-choice voting in recent years at local level. In Oregon, for example – where voters rejected a ballot measure to make the change statewide – ranked choice voting already exists in Portland, Corvallis and elsewhere.
“I think people may be more comfortable with incremental changes,” Pildes said. “If you look below the state level, you see more and more cities and towns using ranked choice voting, and so people will get more experience with the system and depending on how they value that experience, they will at the state level support more.”
At the same time, organizers “need to do more education and engage voters more so that when they see this on the ballot, they understand what the reforms are trying to accomplish,” Troiano said.
As supporters weigh their next steps, opponents of ranked-choice voting and open primaries have also taken steps to expand their presence. In Louisiana, Gov. Jeff Landry (R) signed a law earlier this year that will convert the state’s “jungle” primary system to a closed primary system for certain offices in 2026.
The state’s current system requires all candidates running for the same office to be listed on one ballot, regardless of party affiliation. If no candidate won at least half of the votes, the top two finishers advanced to the general election.
Meanwhile, advocates in Missouri successfully passed a ballot measure to that effect would ban ranked choice voting.
“While Americans are frustrated with politics, I think most Americans are completely fine with the traditional way of voting,” said Trent England, executive director of the anti-ranked choice voter group Save Our States. in a statement.
Proponents acknowledge that changing the electoral system is an uphill task, but they are bullish about the long term and are assessing this year’s results as they look for modern approaches.
“There is obviously widespread dissatisfaction with how the government is doing these days,” Pildes said. “And in times of significant discontent, there are opportunities for political reform.”
