Ranked choice voting improves primaries and caucuses
Executive summary
- Primaries and caucuses determine who will advance to a general election, or which candidate(s) will earn delegates to a convention to choose a political party’s nominee.
- Primaries and caucuses often have large, shifting fields of candidates.
- Ranked choice voting (RCV) helps voters navigate a crowded field of candidates, ensures voters can cast their ballots for their true first choice, and prevents wasted votes. It promotes positive campaigning and strengthens nominees.
- Compared to caucuses, RCV encourages higher voter turnout, saves time and resources, and retains voter privacy.
What are primaries and caucuses?
Primary elections work much like general elections do. Voters cast their ballots for one or more candidates, usually in secret. The candidates with the most votes move on to compete in the general election – or in the case of presidential primaries, earn delegates to a nominating convention.
Caucuses are in-person events held at the county, district, or precinct level by political parties. Attendees divide themselves into groups based on the candidate they support, and give speeches to convince others to join their group. The number of voters in each group at the end of the caucus determines how many delegates each candidate wins. In many caucuses, attendees can “realign” to support a backup choice if their first choice doesn’t get enough support to earn delegates.
How ranked choice voting improves primaries
Picks winners with broad support
Primaries often have more than five candidates running for just one seat, such as Minnesota’s 2022 gubernatorial race, in which nine tickets ran, or New York’s 2021 Democratic mayoral primary, in which thirteen people ran.
When so many candidates run, there’s a strong chance someone wins without the majority of their party behind them – leaving the party weakened heading into the general election.
RCV ensures that the candidate with the broadest appeal wins, and unites parties heading into the general election. The ultimate nominee may not be a voter’s first choice, but may still have been their second or third choice. Voters have a greater incentive to learn about all of the candidates, and get excited about participating.
For instance, seven Republicans ran for governor of Virginia in 2021. Glenn Youngkin prevailed in the nominating contest, which used ranked choice voting. Youngkin won a third of first choices, but thanks to RCV, he was able to win a broader base of voters. He built a majority coalition by earning backup rankings from voters whose first-choice candidates were eliminated, and ultimately, he was able to enter the general election stronger.
Reflects honest voter preferences
Single-choice elections put pressure on voters to vote “strategically” – picking the candidate they believe has the best chance of defeating their last choice, instead of picking someone they like.
RCV minimizes strategic voting by giving voters backup choices; voters can rank the candidates they like most in honest order of preference. If their favorite can’t win, they won’t accidentally help the candidate they like least – their vote will simply count for their next choice.
Prevents wasted votes
Wasted, or “zombie,” votes occur when a candidate’s name appears on the ballot, but they drop out of the race before Election Day. Early and mail-in voters often fill out their ballots a week or more ahead of the election, only to have a candidate they voted for drop out before ballots are counted.
In 2020, over three million votes were “wasted” on Democratic presidential primary candidates who had already withdrawn from the race, representing over 8% of total votes cast in the primaries. In 2016, over 600,000 votes were wasted in the Republican presidential primaries.
RCV prevents votes from being wasted because voters can identify their backup choices. If their first-choice candidate drops out of the race, their ballot simply counts for their next choice, and their voice is still heard.
Promotes positive campaigning
In RCV elections, candidates have an incentive to appeal to a broader range of voters. This often results in more positive and issue-focused campaigns, as candidates strive to appeal to a wider audience. Candidates have less motivation to make personal attacks against their opponents, since they may need to appeal to be the backup choice of voters ranking those opponents Number 1.
In a webinar hosted by RepresentWomen on lessons learned from the 2021 New York City primaries – which used ranked choice voting – four elected women city council members spoke about their campaign experiences. According to Councilmember Nantasha Williams:
If I saw a lawn sign for someone else, I would go to the house and be like, ‘Hey! I agree with them on that. Will you rank me second?’ Something I would’ve never done in a non-RCV election.
Instead of candidates merely pointing out the faults of their opponents, they worked to connect to voters who supported those opponents.
No need for primary runoffs
In single-choice voting, every voter who does not cast a vote for one of the top two candidates effectively does not weigh in on that outcome. Several states and hundreds of cities try to address this by holding primary runoffs, but these runoffs come with huge costs and typically have much lower turnout than the initial race. RCV allows jurisdictions to consolidate their primaries to a single day when turnout is naturally the highest.
How ranked choice voting is better than caucuses
Raises turnout and saves resources
Caucuses are notoriously lengthy processes, often involving multiple rounds of speeches and voting. That places a large burden on voters and depresses voter turnout, particularly among voters who struggle to participate in an hours-long event, like parents with small children. For instance, in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary cycle, every state that used a caucus to award its delegates had lower turnout than every state that used a primary.
RCV primaries allow for caucus-style realignment without the need for voters to appear in person. In an RCV contest, a voter’s ballot automatically counts for their second choice when their first choice is eliminated – the same way a caucus works. This eliminates the time, effort, and resources needed to conduct caucuses, replicating the process in a more efficient and accessible way. An RCV primary would likely have much higher turnout than a caucus in the same state.
Retains voter privacy
RCV can significantly enhance voter privacy compared to caucuses. In a caucus, voters traditionally express their preferences publicly, often by physically moving to different corners of a room to support their chosen candidate. This process can be intimidating for some individuals, and compromises their privacy.
With ranked choice voting, voters can cast secret ballots and keep their preferences private, eliminating the possibility of peer pressure and social shunning. Without these fears, voters may be more likely to express their honest preferences.
Conclusion
Overall, RCV is a fair, efficient way to nominate candidates. It picks winners with broad support, encourages voters to vote for their honest preferences, promotes positive campaigning, strengthens nominees, and retains voter privacy. It also saves much of the time and resources spent on caucuses, encouraging higher turnout. RCV is a valuable tool for anyone looking to reform primaries and caucuses.
This is the fifth post in FairVote’s #PutRCVOnIt series, where we examine how RCV works in conjunction with, and improves, other election reforms and systems. We acknowledge that there are many ideas for improving American democracy, but also that no reform is a silver bullet. We explain why RCV is a key piece of the puzzle, and how it fits in with other pieces.
