Memphis mayor elected with just 28% of the vote. The city needs ranked choice voting.
Last night, Memphis elected a mayor with only 28% of the vote, according to preliminary results. Most Memphis voters actually voted against their mayor-to-be – an inevitability in a crowded race with single-choice voting. If Memphis used ranked choice voting (RCV) – which Memphians voted for three times in 2008 and 2018 – its mayor-elect would enter office with a clear mandate from voters.
17 candidates vied to replace term-limited Mayor Jim Strickland. Paul Young, President and CEO of the Downtown Memphis Commission, came out on top with just 28%. He was followed closely by Shelby County Sheriff Floyd Bonner with 23%, former Memphis Mayor Willie Herenton at 21%, and President of the Memphis NAACP Van Turner, also at 21%. In crowded elections like this, it’s hard to say if the result was representative, or if it was a consequence of vote-splitting.
Memphis’s one-round, nonpartisan mayoral race is a rarity. Most large U.S. cities use some mechanism to prevent chaotic elections and unrepresentative outcomes, such as a “primary and general” or “general and runoff” system. However, two-step elections are neither the most effective nor most representative way to choose local leaders.
For example, when no candidate won a majority of votes in the 2023 Nashville mayoral election, the top two candidates proceeded to a runoff a month later. However, those top two candidates advanced with a combined 47.3% of votes, meaning the city had to pay for another election where the majority of voters didn’t see their top choice on the ballot. Runoffs can cost cities hundreds of thousands of dollars, even though turnout often plummets compared to the first round.
RCV, on the other hand, identifies a consensus winner with just one round of voting. Voters can rank the candidates in order of preference. If no candidate has a majority of first-choice support, the runoff is instant. Supporters of low-performing candidates have their ballot count towards their next choice.
As noted above, Memphis voters have already asked for RCV – multiple times. In 2008, voters approved an RCV ballot measure with a whopping 71% in support. Though RCV had yet to be implemented, the Memphis City Council put a referendum on the ballot in 2018 that would repeal RCV – which was rejected by 63% of voters. That same day, Memphians also rejected another ballot measure which would have amended the city charter to use plurality voting. The movement to implement RCV was further complicated when the Tennessee legislature prohibited RCV in 2022 – a move contrary to the will of voters.
In addition to identifying consensus leaders, RCV can also increase the quality of debates and campaigns. Bolts Magazine describes how single-choice voting made for a messy mayoral race in Memphis:
It’s been exceedingly difficult for the conversations to go beyond sound bites or to really air out any policy disagreements between any two candidates… Even in smaller debates organized by the media, candidates have had limited time to state their cases and have struggled to distinguish themselves. The dynamic has heightened competition, incentivizing attack ads and even jockeying among the candidates over who has the best Christian faith credentials.
RCV, on the other hand, encourages positive, issue-oriented campaigning. Candidates benefit from being the second or third choice of their opponents’ supporters, and can achieve this by playing nice. Candidates can also cross-endorse each other, providing a clear signal to voters about ideology and policy preferences.
RCV has been successful in over 50 U.S. jurisdictions, including large, diverse cities similar to Memphis. RCV would be a win-win for Memphians; Memphis could keep using one-round elections, and also guarantee fair and representative outcomes.
