After years of political polarization and extremist candidates, Americans have grown tired of our current system of elections. The country’s views of both major parties have continuously worsened over time, with Pew Research Center reporting a record number of disapproving Americans in the past three decades of polling. While experts continue to debate the cause of apathetic voters, the faults of the two-party system should not be overlooked. The United States needs to consider election reform, and rank-choice voting could be the solution.
Although its implementation in the U.S. is relatively new, rank-choice voting (RCV) has been around since the 1850s. Rank-choice voting is an electoral system in which voters rank proposed candidates instead of choosing just one, assigning them first, second, third, fourth, and so on. Then, the candidate who earns the least first place votes is removed from the election, and voters who selected them as first choice will instead have their second pick counted. This process continues until a candidate wins the majority of first-place votes.
The system has already seen success in state elections. Currently, Alaska, Maine, and Hawaii use RCV state-wide and 14 states have incorporated it into their municipal elections. New voters have begun to take notice of this system, urging America to take a note from other democracies.
“More U.S. states should adopt rank choice voting because it ensures that a person elected is approved by the majority of voters,” said senior Orrin Bossert. “Many other countries similar to ours, notably Australia, have adopted this system.”
Rank-choice voting addresses many shared concerns of the American public, such as the dominance of the two major parties. RCV allows voters to advocate their support for third-party candidates without the fear that they would be indirectly helping their least favorite candidate. Instead of feeling like they would be stealing votes from a more popular candidate, their votes will be counted towards their second-choice if their first choice does not win. This change would allow third-parties to overcome barriers and earn the support of new voters.
“The winner-take-all system like in the electoral college makes it very hard for other parties to become relevant, which can be a problem because political ideology is often multi-dimensional,” said senior Keller Yan. “I’d like to see more parties given a chance rather than the constant push and pull between Republicans and Democrats.”
In addition to helping third-party candidates, RCV also incentivizes politicians to appeal to a wider base of voters. Instead of just campaigning to be voters’ first choice, candidates are also rewarded for becoming voters’ second or third choices. If politicians are campaigning to a diverse group of voters, it can help ensure that the whole constituency is being represented. This can help safeguard against extreme political parties causing political polarization.
In response to the rank-choice voting movement in recent years, social studies teacher Mr. Thomas Beaupre taught his students a lesson on rank-choice voting. Although he acknowledges its benefits, he emphasizes that the hardest part about this change would be informing voters.
“The big step is educating people, getting them to understand whether it’s ranked-choice voting or some other system, so that they’ll understand it and be comfortable with it,” said Mr. Beaupre, “because if they don’t understand it, and they’re not comfortable with it, they will not come out and vote. And, we don’t want to introduce that into our elections.”
Despite some U.S. states adopting the new voting system, it has also been outlawed in many states. Critics of rank-choice voting argue that the process is time consuming and costly. Because of the added steps of RCV, it takes longer to acquire the results. Additionally, it would be challenging to switch to an entirely new system across the country, requiring updated voting equipment and training for poll workers.
“It could be difficult to move away from the current system which people are familiar and comfortable with,” said Yan.
Not to mention, some political officials just disagree with the practice fundamentally. They believe that votes should only be counted once, viewing the positives of RCV as a negative.
On the other hand, I believe that the additional time and money spent on transitioning to rank-choice voting would be justified by the benefits this new system could bring. By bolstering third party candidates and encouraging politicians to reach across the aisle on policies, RCV has the power to combat political division and misrepresentation. In my opinion, better cooperation between political parties and voter satisfaction is priceless.
A federal law to legalize rank-choice voting would help clear the stigma from this new system and give states a push in the right direction to implement it into their elections. After it is used at the state-level, it could be integrated into federal elections. I do not doubt that restructuring our electoral system is the fresh start that will breathe new life into American politics.