The writers might want to update the article to include that an effort to repeal ranked-choice voting and open primaries in Alaska was defeated. It was down to the wire and decided by just 664 votes of 340,510 total votes, when the Division of Elections announced "final unofficial results." Next step is an official certification by Nov. 30. If the numbers hold, the repeal side will have five days to request a recount, which they've said they will do. Despite other disappointments of the 2024 election cycle, RCV advocates can be heartened and proud of our victory in Alaska.
Big RCV needs to spend less time and money trying to control political scientists, then more time doing homework on the reforms it wants them to support. DemocracySOS has been relentless in its flogging of political scientists. Elsewhere, the line last May was that philanthropy should intervene in academic hiring to produce research findings consistent with the RCV agenda, lest we all become defenders of “the status quo.” Now the emerging line seems to be that it’s too late to revisit old decisions, and thus political scientists (and others) just need to live with them.
"There were numerous election reforms on the ballot in addition to ranked choice voting – including independent redistricting commissions and open primaries. All have won statewide victories in recent years. This cycle, all of them failed at the statewide level."
Actually, election reform ballot proposals passed handily in a number of states. For example, a ban on voting by non-citizens and minors was on the ballot in 8 states, and passed by impressive margins in all. In Missouri the amendment incorporated a ban on RCV, too.
In Nevada a voter ID proposal passed with 73% of the vote.
It's worth remembering that the denotation of "reform" is just change, and it's connotation, that the change is for the better, is a judgment people can disagree with. The above ballot proposals were all "election reforms" in the opinion of a majority of the voters.
It's important to remember that sometimes it's not that you failed to persuade, it's that the other guys succeeded.
My own personal opinion is that RCV is based on a mistaken notion, that the average voter actually HAS well formed ranked preference beyond their first choice. This over-estimates by a large margin just how much thought people invest in voting.
Best of luck with proportional representation, though.
The writers might want to update the article to include that an effort to repeal ranked-choice voting and open primaries in Alaska was defeated. It was down to the wire and decided by just 664 votes of 340,510 total votes, when the Division of Elections announced "final unofficial results." Next step is an official certification by Nov. 30. If the numbers hold, the repeal side will have five days to request a recount, which they've said they will do. Despite other disappointments of the 2024 election cycle, RCV advocates can be heartened and proud of our victory in Alaska.
https://www.adn.com/politics/2024/11/20/ranked-choice-voting-retained-in-alaska-after-final-ballot-count/
Big RCV needs to spend less time and money trying to control political scientists, then more time doing homework on the reforms it wants them to support. DemocracySOS has been relentless in its flogging of political scientists. Elsewhere, the line last May was that philanthropy should intervene in academic hiring to produce research findings consistent with the RCV agenda, lest we all become defenders of “the status quo.” Now the emerging line seems to be that it’s too late to revisit old decisions, and thus political scientists (and others) just need to live with them.
"There were numerous election reforms on the ballot in addition to ranked choice voting – including independent redistricting commissions and open primaries. All have won statewide victories in recent years. This cycle, all of them failed at the statewide level."
Actually, election reform ballot proposals passed handily in a number of states. For example, a ban on voting by non-citizens and minors was on the ballot in 8 states, and passed by impressive margins in all. In Missouri the amendment incorporated a ban on RCV, too.
In Nevada a voter ID proposal passed with 73% of the vote.
It's worth remembering that the denotation of "reform" is just change, and it's connotation, that the change is for the better, is a judgment people can disagree with. The above ballot proposals were all "election reforms" in the opinion of a majority of the voters.
It's important to remember that sometimes it's not that you failed to persuade, it's that the other guys succeeded.
My own personal opinion is that RCV is based on a mistaken notion, that the average voter actually HAS well formed ranked preference beyond their first choice. This over-estimates by a large margin just how much thought people invest in voting.
Best of luck with proportional representation, though.
Great piece. Passing the Fair Representation Act would be an amazing step for our democracy...