Recall elections are better with ranked choice voting
Some American cities and states allow for recall elections – which let voters remove a public official from office in the middle of their term. Recalls are useful for holding elected officials accountable, but may create uncertainty without a smooth process for choosing a replacement. Ranked choice voting (RCV) can swiftly identify suitable successors, even in crowded candidate fields.
How do recall elections work?
Typically, recall elections occur when citizens gather a certain number of signatures to recall an official. In some places, petitioners can only initiate a recall if an elected official has committed misconduct. In other places, a recall can be initiated for any reason.
When a recall election occurs, many jurisdictions hold an election for the incumbent’s replacement on the same ballot, and the highest-performing candidate takes office if a majority of voters choose to recall the incumbent.
What can go wrong?
The recall process sounds straightforward, but in practice, it is vulnerable to quirky and unrepresentative outcomes. Recall elections typically require a majority of votes to recall an official – but not to choose their replacement. Candidates elected in recalls may be no more popular than the officials they replace.
Take the 2019 mayoral recall election in Fall River, Massachusetts. 61% voted to recall Mayor Jasiel Correira after he defrauded investors in his startup company. However, Fall River held the replacement election on the same ballot as the recall election. Correira ran to replace himself, and won with just 35% of votes. The remaining 65% of votes were split between four other candidates. Majorities of voters voted to recall Correira and replace him with someone else, yet Correira retained his position.
More recently, voters initiated a recall election for California Governor Gavin Newsom in 2021. The replacement election was on the same ballot as the recall election. Over 50 candidates ran to replace Newsom – creating a strong risk of vote-splitting. Newsom ultimately survived with 62% voting “no” on the recall. Had Newsom been recalled, conservative Republican Larry Elder would have replaced him with a minority of votes.
RCV improves recall elections
Jurisdictions with recall provisions should use RCV for their replacement elections. Voters would vote “yes” or “no” on recalling the incumbent, and then rank the potential replacement candidates. If the recall succeeds but no replacement candidate has a majority of support, an instant runoff would occur to choose the most popular replacement.
The recalled official would be held accountable, and their successor would have a clear mandate to govern. An RCV election can be tabulated instantly, allowing for a swift transition of power.
This is the sixth post in FairVote’s ongoing #PutRCVOnIt series, where we examine how RCV works in conjunction with, and improves, other election reforms. 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.
