1. Enable political parties to use RCV in presidential preference primaries.
2. Require RCV in elections for US Senate and US Representative.
3. Give municipalities the option to use RCV in single winner municipal elections.
1. Enable political parties to use RCV in presidential preference primaries.
2. Require RCV in elections for US Senate and US Representative.
3. Give municipalities the option to use RCV in single winner municipal elections.
1. Enable political parties to use RCV in presidential preference primaries.
2. Require RCV in elections for US Senate and US Representative.
3. Give municipalities the option to use RCV in single winner municipal elections.
With more choice, voters have a stronger voice in the outcome of elections and greater confidence their vote will make a difference.
RCV elections are proven to level the playing field and help women, BIPOC, and first-time candidates.
In RCV, no vote for any candidate is ever “wasted” and no candidate is a “spoiler.”
With more viable candidates on the ballot and greater voter power and voice, voters participate more fully in our electoral process.
Voters who have used RCV prefer it.
Candidates do best when they appeal to a broader range of voters.
Negative attacks may alienate voters and lose crucial 2nd and 3rd choice support the candidate needs to win in an RCV election.
By ensuring that a candidate wins with the support of a majority, RCV eliminates the cost, inconvenience and precipitous decline in turnout associated with traditional runoff elections.
RCV is a method of voting where the voter can rank more than one candidate in order of preference on the ballot (1st Choice, 2nd Choice, etc.), eliminating the need to conduct separate runoff elections.
If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices, that candidate wins just like in any other election.
However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by “instant runoff.”
The candidate with fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as “number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until two candidates remain, and the majority candidate wins.
However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by “instant runoff.”
The candidate with fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as “number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until two candidates remain, and the majority candidate wins.
The benefits of RCV are particularly pronounced in a presidential primary because of the large number of candidates the presidential primaries often draw.
The option to rank multiple candidates benefits both voters and candidates and produces more representative results.
Voters can express honest preferences without fear that their vote will be wasted or will help the candidate(s) they like the least.
Candidates with similar ideologies or backgrounds don’t have to worry that they are dividing support.
All candidates are incentivized to build inclusive campaigns to appeal broadly and not merely to a single “base.”
The candidates with the broadest support come out on top and every voter’s voice is heard.
The proposed legislation requires using an RCV ballot, but the parties remain free to determine whether or how to take advantage of the RCV results in allocating delegates at conventions.
If the party chooses to award convention delegates to a single “winner,” it can continue, as now, to award all delegates to a candidate who was not necessarily supported by a majority.
Or it can use RCV to assure that the “winner” has the support of the majority.
And, if the party awards delegates on the basis of each candidate’s proportional share of the vote, it can use RCV to make its allocation even more representative.
• Numerous polls and other hard data show voters find RCV easy and intuitive.
• Voters who have used RCV like it.
• Rates of ballot error in RCV are low and no greater than in any other form of voting.
• The cost of RCV will be virtually zero.
• Connecticut’s antiquated voting machines need to be replaced no matter what.
• All modern machines are RCV capable.
• RCV majorities are just as real as in any runoff election where the number of voters participating in the runoff may be less than the total number of voters.
• RCV ballots are never thrown out – they are all counted equally and as cast.
• In RCV, every voter has the same opportunity to participate in the runoffs.
• Now is precisely the time for a change that puts voters first.
• RCV returns electoral choice and power to the voters where it belongs.
• RCV restores trust and confidence in our institutions.
In 2020, 6 Democratic state parties used RCV for their presidential primary elections: Alaska, Nevada, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, and Wyoming.
Six states currently use RCV for military and overseas voters in federal runoff elections.
RCV has long been used in federal and party elections in Australia, for the President of Ireland, in party elections in Canada, for the Mayor of London, in the Academy Awards and elsewhere.
Other American politicians have spoken out on the benefits of RCV including former Illinois Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger, Senator Elizabeth Warren, former President Obama, Andrew Yang, former Republican Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld, Libertarian Party presidential nominee Jo Jorgensen, former Florida Republican Representative David Jolly and former Republican Governor of Utah Gary Herbert, among others.
U.S. House Representative Jim Himes sponsored RCV legislation.
9 Nobel Laureates recommend RCV.
10 winners of the Johan Skytte Prize (the “Nobel” of political science) support use of RCV to improve representation.
Leading political scientists, newspapers and journals worldwide, such as Connecticut’s The Day, have advocated for RCV.
In 2020, 6 Democratic state parties used RCV for their presidential primary elections: Alaska, Nevada, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, and Wyoming.
Six states currently use RCV for military and overseas voters in federal runoff elections.
RCV has long been used in federal and party elections in Australia, for the President of Ireland, in party elections in Canada, for the Mayor of London, in the Academy Awards and elsewhere.
Other American politicians have spoken out on the benefits of RCV including former Illinois Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger, Senator Elizabeth Warren, former President Obama, Andrew Yang, former Republican Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld, Libertarian Party presidential nominee Jo Jorgensen, former Florida Republican Representative David Jolly and former Republican Governor of Utah Gary Herbert, among others.
U.S. House Representative Jim Himes sponsored RCV legislation.
9 Nobel Laureates recommend RCV.
10 winners of the Johan Skytte Prize (the “Nobel” of political science) support use of RCV to improve representation.
Leading political scientists, newspapers and journals worldwide, such as Connecticut’s The Day, have advocated for RCV.
In 2020, 6 Democratic state parties used RCV for their presidential primary elections: Alaska, Nevada, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, and Wyoming.
Six states currently use RCV for military and overseas voters in federal runoff elections.
RCV has long been used in federal and party elections in Australia, for the President of Ireland, in party elections in Canada, for the Mayor of London, in the Academy Awards and elsewhere.
Other American politicians have spoken out on the benefits of RCV including former Illinois Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger, Senator Elizabeth Warren, former President Obama, Andrew Yang, former Republican Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld, Libertarian Party presidential nominee Jo Jorgensen, former Florida Republican Representative David Jolly and former Republican Governor of Utah Gary Herbert, among others.
U.S. House Representative Jim Himes sponsored RCV legislation.
9 Nobel Laureates recommend RCV.
10 winners of the Johan Skytte Prize (the “Nobel” of political science) support use of RCV to improve representation.
Leading political scientists, newspapers and journals worldwide, such as Connecticut’s The Day, have advocated for RCV.
Given the choice, most voters prefer to rank candidates rather than selecting just one.
67% of Ranked Choice Voting ballots rank at least two candidates.
50% of ballots use the maximum number of rankings allowed.
In major elections, 9 in 10 voters exercise their power to rank.
Winners of RCV races tend to be ranked highly on many ballots, even beyond the majority needed to be elected.
67% of ballots typically rank the winning candidate in their top three choices.
With modern ballot design, 99.8% of voters regularly cast valid RCV ballots.
Ballot error rate is comparable or lower than in non-RCV races.
Given the choice, most voters prefer to rank candidates rather than selecting just one.
67% of Ranked Choice Voting ballots rank at least two candidates.
50% of ballots use the maximum number of rankings allowed.
In major elections, 9 in 10 voters exercise their power to rank.
Winners of RCV races tend to be ranked highly on many ballots, even beyond the majority needed to be elected.
67% of ballots typically rank the winning candidate in their top three choices.
With modern ballot design, 99.8% of voters regularly cast valid RCV ballots.
Ballot error rate is comparable or lower than in non-RCV races.
Given the choice, most voters prefer to rank candidates rather than selecting just one.
67% of Ranked Choice Voting ballots rank at least two candidates.
50% of ballots use the maximum number of rankings allowed.
In major elections, 9 in 10 voters exercise their power to rank.
Winners of RCV races tend to be ranked highly on many ballots, even beyond the majority needed to be elected.
67% of ballots typically rank the winning candidate in their top three choices.
With modern ballot design, 99.8% of voters regularly cast valid RCV ballots.
Ballot error rate is comparable or lower than in non-RCV races.
favored by Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters alike.
RCV is popular because it will help build consensus and put an end to the growing division and polarization of America.
At all levels of government, hyper partisanship prevents elected representatives from working together effectively to solve the real problems facing our communities.
Americans are eager to find shared ground, but our current plurality system of elections encourages division and discourages consensus.
RCV advocates are united by a shared desire for solutions that put voters first for a more representative and functional government.
RCV is popular because it will help build consensus and put an end to the growing division and polarization of America.
At all levels of government, hyper partisanship prevents elected representatives from working together effectively to solve the real problems facing our communities.
Americans are eager to find shared ground, but our current plurality system of elections encourages division and discourages consensus.
RCV advocates are united by a shared desire for solutions that put voters first for a more representative and functional government.
Currently, our singular focus is passing Instant Runoff
(aka Ranked Choice) Voting legislation in Connecticut.
Members of our board of advisors and their allies were instrumental in persuading the current Governor of Connecticut, if re-elected, to introduce such legislation in the next legislative session of Connecticut’s General Assembly. Our current goal is to build on that initial success.
Where Instant Runoff Voting has been adopted, it has increased the number of viable candidates, increased voter participation, reduced extremism, improved the character of campaigns and assured that the winning candidate had the support of the majority of voters and not merely that of the largest or most active minority.
