Georgia primary elections head to costly, unnecessary runoffs
On May 19, Georgia held primary elections for hundreds of federal and state offices. Several statewide and congressional races – most notably the Republican primaries for governor and U.S. Senate – will go to delayed runoffs a month from now, because no candidate earned a majority of the vote.
These runoffs will likely cost Georgia taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, and subject voters to another four weeks of toxic campaigning – all for elections likely to see significantly lower turnout. Since 1994, the median turnout decline in Georgia runoffs is 36%.
Ranked choice voting (RCV) – also known as “instant runoff voting” – is a better, faster, cheaper alternative that would ensure nominees have majority support, without the cost or diminished turnout of runoffs.
High costs and low turnout likely in Georgia primary runoffs
Runoff elections are supposed to make government more representative by electing candidates with majority support. But in practice, runoffs usually shrink the electorate and come with a significant price tag for taxpayers. Research on primary runoffs across the nation finds an average 40% turnout drop from the initial election.
In 2024, Georgia primary runoffs saw turnout fall by as much as 62% for a U.S. House race and 78% for a State Senate race.
Recent Georgia runoffs have also come with a hefty price tag, for taxpayers and campaigns alike. On taxpayers’ side, runoffs mean many election costs are duplicated for the same race. In Georgia’s 2020 U.S. Senate runoff elections, for instance, taxpayers spent $75 million for an election in which 467,273 fewer people voted.
On the candidate and campaign side, runoffs mean they spend even more money attacking primary opponents, rather than shifting their focus to the general election.
In Georgia’s Republican gubernatorial primary, candidates have spent over $100 million so far – and now that will continue for an extra month. Nominees may enter the general election with less cash on hand, and after the other party’s nominee has had a month-long head start on the general election campaign.
Ranked choice voting would save time and money in Georgia primary elections
Ranked choice voting offers a better, faster, cheaper alternative. RCV allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, with an “instant runoff” determining a majority winner when necessary. This means winners are determined on Election Day, when participation is highest and voters still have access to the full range of choices.
With RCV, voters wouldn’t need to cast a second ballot for the same contest, and taxpayers wouldn’t have to cover the cost of a second election. Candidates could shift their focus – and spending – to the general election more quickly.
To support RCV in the Peach State, visit Better Ballot Georgia today!
Other election news from Alabama and Pennsylvania
Georgia wasn’t the only state that held primary elections on Tuesday. Races elsewhere also showed the flaws of existing election methods.
In Alabama, statewide primaries for U.S. Senate, lieutenant governor, and attorney general will go to runoffs – meaning the state will experience the same costs and turnout problems as their neighbors in Georgia.
And in Pennsylvania, which does not use runoff elections, candidates won two crowded Democratic U.S. House primaries (PA-3 and PA-7) with just 42% and 44% of the vote. One of those candidates is all but certain to win the general election in a safe seat – meaning he was chosen by just a fraction of the primary electorate. The other candidate faces a competitive race in November, meaning his party will enter the general election without a majority-supported nominee.
Ranked choice voting would solve all of these problems – letting voters pick majority nominees on a single primary day, without the cost or low turnout of delayed runoffs.
