Ranked Choice Voting Information

Sign up for the latest news from the ranked choice voting movement, or get involved in your community.

On this page

Where is ranked choice voting used?

As of March 2026, 49 American jurisdictions use ranked choice voting (RCV) in public elections or have passed it for upcoming elections, reaching nearly 14 million voters across 22 states and Washington, DC.

Two states, Maine and Alaska, use RCV statewide. 36 cities and 3 counties use it for local elections. One state uses RCV for special elections, and six states and one city use RCV ballots for military and overseas voters in runoff elections.

Jurisdictions using RCV

  • Alaska: Adopted in 2020 for elections for president, Congress, governor, and state legislature. First used in 2022. For congressional and state elections, Alaska first holds a nonpartisan primary with choose-one voting, and the top four candidates advance to a general election with RCV.
  • Maine: Adopted in 2016 for congressional primary and general elections, as well as for state primary elections. First used in 2018. Expanded to presidential general elections in 2020 and presidential primaries in 2024.
  • Albany, California: Adopted proportional RCV in 2020 for nonpartisan elections to the City Council and School Board. First used in November 2022. Elections for four-year terms are held in November of even years.
  • Arden, Delaware: Adopted proportional RCV in the early 20th century for nonpartisan elections to the village’s seven-member board of assessors. Used annually.
  • Arlington, Virginia: Adopted in December 2022 for partisan primary elections for county board starting in 2023. Expanded to general elections starting in 2024. Proportional RCV is used when two seats are elected. Used annually for four-year terms.
  • Basalt, Colorado: Adopted in 2002 for nonpartisan mayoral races with three or more candidates. First used in 2020 for a four-year term.
  • Benton County, Oregon: Adopted in 2016 for partisan general elections for the county commission (with at-large numbered post) and sheriff. First used in November 2020. Used every November of even years.
  • Berkeley, California: Adopted in 2004 and used since 2010 in nonpartisan elections for mayor, City Council, and city auditor. Elections for four-year terms are held in November of even years.
  • Bloomington, Minnesota: Adopted in 2020 for nonpartisan elections for mayor and City Council. First used in November 2021. Elections are for four-year terms held in November of even years.
  • Boulder, Colorado: Adopted in 2020 for nonpartisan elections for mayor, starting in November 2023. Mayoral elections are held every four years.
  • Burlington, Vermont: Adopted by voters in 2021 for partisan City Council elections and special elections, and expanded in 2023 to cover all other local elections, including mayor. First used in 2022. Elections are held every March for three-year terms.
  • Cambridge, Massachusetts: Adopted proportional RCV in 1941 for nonpartisan, at-large elections for nine City Council and six School Board seats. These elections for two-year terms occur in November of odd years.
  • Carbondale, Colorado: Adopted in a new charter in 2002 for nonpartisan mayoral races with three or more candidates. Not yet used as of 2026.
  • Charlottesville, Virginia: In 2024, City Council approved a pilot of proportional RCV in the 2025 partisan City Council primary.
  • Corvallis, Oregon: Adopted by the City Council in 2022 for nonpartisan elections of the mayor (four-year term) and City Council seats (2-year terms). First used in 2022.
  • Easthampton, Massachusetts: Adopted in 2019 for nonpartisan mayoral and single-seat City Council elections. First used in 2021. Elections are held in November of odd years for four-year terms.
  • Eureka, California: Adopted in 2020 for nonpartisan elections for mayor and City Council. First use scheduled for November 2026.
  • Fort Collins, Colorado: Adopted in 2022 for nonpartisan elections for mayor and City Council. First used in 2025. Elections are held in November of odd years for four-year terms.
  • Las Cruces, New Mexico: Adopted in 2018 for all nonpartisan city elections, including mayor and City Council. First used in 2019. Elections are held in November of odd years for four-year terms.
  • Minneapolis, Minnesota: Adopted in 2006 for nonpartisan elections for 22 city offices, including mayor and City Council – with some Park Board and Board of Taxation seats using proportional RCV. First used in 2009. Elections are held in November every four years.
  • Minnetonka, Minnesota: Adopted in 2020 for nonpartisan elections for mayor and City Council. First used in 2021.
  • Multnomah County, Oregon: Adopted in 2022 for nonpartisan elections for County Commission. First use is scheduled for November 2026.
  • New York, New York: Adopted in 2019 for partisan primary elections and special elections for mayor, public advocate, comptroller, borough presidents, and City Council. First used in 2021. Elections are held for four-year terms every four years.
  • Oakland, California: Adopted in 2006 for nonpartisan elections and special elections for 18 city offices, including mayor, School Board, and City Council. First used in 2010. Elections are held for four-year terms in November of even years.
  • Portland, Maine: Adopted in 2010 for nonpartisan elections for mayor, and first used in 2011. In 2020, expanded to apply to City Council, Charter Commission, and School Board. In 2022, voters authorized the City Council to adopt proportional RCV for multi-winner elections. Elections are held for four-year terms in November of every year.
  • Portland, Oregon: Adopted in 2022 for nonpartisan elections – with single-winner RCV for mayor and proportional RCV in three-seat City Council districts. First used in 2024. Elections for four-year terms are held in November of even years.
  • Redondo Beach, California: Adopted in 2023 for nonpartisan elections for City Council, mayor, and other citywide offices beginning in 2025. Elections are held for four-year terms in the spring of odd years.
  • San Francisco, California: Adopted in 2002 for nonpartisan elections and special elections for 18 offices, including mayor, city attorney, and Board of Supervisors. First used in 2004. Elections for four-year terms are held in November of even years.
  • San Leandro, California: Adopted as option in 2000 charter amendment for nonpartisan elections for mayor and city council (elected at-large, by numbered post). First used in 2010. Elections are held for four-year terms in November of even years.
  • Santa Fe, New Mexico: Adopted in 2008 for nonpartisan elections for mayor, City Council, and municipal judge. First used in 2018. Elections for three-year terms are held in November.
  • St. Louis Park, Minnesota: Adopted in 2018 and used since 2019 for nonpartisan elections for mayor and City Council races (at-large by numbered post). Elections for four-year terms are held in November of odd years.
  • St. Paul, Minnesota: Adopted in 2009 for nonpartisan elections and special elections for mayor and the City Council. First used in 2011. Elections for four-year terms are held in November of odd years.
  • Takoma Park, Maryland: Adopted in 2006 for nonpartisan elections and special elections for mayor and City Council. First used in 2007. Elections are held in November of even years for all offices.
  • Washington, District of Columbia: Adopted in 2024 for partisan primary elections and general elections for mayor, City Council, and other offices. For the District’s at-large Council seats, the “bottoms up” form of RCV will be used. First use scheduled for June 2026. Elections for four-year terms are held in even years.
  • Westbrook, Maine: Adopted by voters in 2021 for nonpartisan elections for mayor, City Council, and School Committee. First used in 2024. Elections are held in November every three years.
  • Hawaii: Adopted in 2022 for special federal elections and filling county council vacancies.

    To see how RCV is working in practice, visit FairVote’s Data on RCV page.

Upcoming implementations

Passed with barriers to use

Cities and counties around the country have passed ordinances asking their state legislatures to authorize them to use RCV.

In some cities, ranked choice voting would take effect as soon as the legislature acts. Those cities are:

In other cases, once the legislature acts, the city would hold a ballot measure on whether to adopt RCV. Those cities are:

In addition, voters in several cities and counties have passed advisory measures that encourage their local governments to pursue RCV, or have passed charter amendments that give local governments the option to adopt RCV. Those jurisdictions include:

  • Davis, CA – RCV advisory measure approved by voters in 2006
  • Greenbelt, MD – Proportional RCV advisory measure approved by voters in 2025
  • Ojai, CA – RCV approved by voters in 2022
  • Santa Clara County, CA – RCV approved by voters in 1998 as a charter amendment creating the option to enact by ordinance
  • Vancouver, WA – RCV approved by voters in 1999 as a charter amendment creating the option to enact by ordinance

Local options bills

Some states have passed “local options bills” explicitly granting local governments the right to use RCV for their elections. Cities in other states may still be able to adopt RCV, depending on the degree of control state law gives them over their elections. Some past pilot bills have expired, including in Utah, where more than 20 cities used RCV during the pilot in 2019-2025.

  • Virginia passed a law in 2020 granting cities the option to use RCV in municipal elections beginning in 2022.
  • Colorado passed a law in 2021 making it easier for cities to opt-into RCV based on a 2008 local option law by giving them technical support through their county clerk offices.

Military and overseas voters in runoffs

  • Alabama: By agreement with a federal court, used in a special election for U.S. House in 2013; by law, used in all federal primary runoffs beginning in 2015.
  • Arkansas: Adopted in 2005. First used in 2006. Extended to all local runoffs in 2007.
  • Georgia: Adopted in 2021. First use in 2022 for military and overseas voters.
  • Illinois municipalities: An Illinois law adopted in 2023 explicitly authorizes municipalities to use ranked ballots for overseas voters. The state capital, Springfield, had already adopted the policy in 2007 and first used it in 2011.
  • Louisiana: Adopted and used since the 1990s for state and federal general election runoffs; also used by out-of-state military voters.
  • Mississippi: Agreed in 2014 federal court consent decree to use RCV ballots in federal runoffs.
  • South Carolina: Adopted and first used in 2006 for state and federal runoffs.

Presidential primaries and caucuses

Ranked choice voting is uniquely well-suited to improve presidential primaries, ensuring winners have broad support and helping parties nominate strong candidates. RCV also addresses the problem of presidential primary voters casting an early or absentee ballot for a candidate who withdraws before their state’s primary day. This happened to over 3 million in Democratic voters in 2020, and hundreds of thousands of Republican voters in 2016 and 2024. Read more in our reports on the 2020 and 2024 primary cycles.

  • Alaska: All Democratic primary voters in 2020.
  • Hawaii: All Democratic primary voters in 2020.
  • Kansas: All Democratic primary voters in 2020.
  • Maine: All presidential primary voters in 2024.
  • Nevada: All early voters in Democratic caucuses in 2020.  
  • U.S. Virgin Islands: All Republican primary voters in 2024.
  • Wyoming: All Democratic primary voters in 2020.

Learn about how RCV improves presidential primaries here.

*In 2020, Democratic state parties conducted an RCV tally until all candidates exceeded 15% of the vote statewide and in each congressional district, after which delegates were allocated proportionally. RCV can work for both proportional and winner-take-all primaries.

Party elections and conventions

  • Virginia Republicans: Used RCV extensively in party-run primaries and conventions, beginning in 2020 to choose their statewide party chair. In 2021, they used RCV to select their nominees for statewide office, including now-Governor Glenn Youngkin. In 2022, they used RCV to select nominees in several congressional districts, including District 8, District 10, District 11, and a special election for District 4.
  • Pennsylvania Democrats: First used RCV in December 2022 for party-run contests to select nominees for three state legislative special elections, and used in some subsequent party contests to fill vacancies.
  • Delaware Democratic Party: Used RCV to choose delegates to the Democratic National Convention in 2020, but only when a tie resulted due to the inability to offer in-person second ballots.
  • Democrats Abroad Convention: Used RCV to choose delegates to the Democratic National Convention in 2020.
  • Indiana Republican Party: Used RCV to nominate its candidate for attorney general at its virtual convention in 2020.
  • Minnesota Democratic Party: Used RCV to endorse various offices during the state convention balloting period in 2020.
  • Nebraska Democratic Party: Used RCV to choose state party officers and county party officers in counties with more than 50,000 people in 2020.
  • New Mexico Democratic Party: Used RCV to choose district-level delegates to the Democratic National Convention in 2020.
  • Oklahoma Democratic Party: Used RCV to choose pledged party leader and elected official (PLEO) delegates; district-level delegates; and at-large delegates and alternates in 2020.
  • Utah Republican Party: Used RCV at state convention in 2020 to determine which candidates for Congress, governor, attorney general, state school board, and state legislature advanced directly to the general election and which advanced to a June primary. Party has also used RCV in several other state and local contests.
  • Utah Democratic Party: Used RCV in 2020 to elect party officers and determine which candidates advanced to the June 30 primary. Races for U.S. House, governor, national party committee officers and party secretary used RCV.

International elections

Tens of millions of voters around the world use ranked choice voting in regular elections.

Examples include: 

  • Australia: Uses proportional RCV for Senate elections. Uses single-winner RCV for House of Representatives elections and most state and local elections. 
  • India: Elected officials use single-winner RCV for president and proportional RCV for the Senate.
  • Ireland: Uses single-winner RCV for president. Uses proportional RCV for parliamentary elections and many local elections.
  • Malta: Uses proportional RCV for parliamentary elections.
  • Nepal: Elected officials use proportional RCV to elect the Senate.
  • New Zealand: Uses single-winner and proportional RCV for local elections in several cities, including the capital city of Wellington. Uses proportional RCV for health board elections.
  • Northern Ireland: Uses proportional RCV for its parliament and most local elections.
  • Pakistan: Elected officials use proportional RCV to elect the Senate.
  • Scotland: Uses proportional RCV for all local government elections.
  • Sri Lanka: Uses the contingent vote form of RCV to elect its president.

RCV in private organizations

Ranked choice voting is widely used by corporations and private organizations which recognize it as an efficient, effective way to conduct elections. Visit this page for a partial list of the organizations using RCV.

RCV in sports awards

The winners of most major sports awards, from the Heisman Trophy to the Cy Young, are chosen using a form of ranked choice voting known as “A ranked voting method for Single-Winner races. Voters rank candidates and the rankings are converted into points. Candidates receive the most points for being ranked first, fewer points for being ranked second, and so on. The candidate with the most points wins.Borda Count.”

It’s different from the “instant runoff” form of RCV used in public elections across the United States, but the basics are the same – voters get to rank candidates, and the winning candidate is decided based on those rankings!

Visit this page to learn more about RCV in sports awards.

RCV in campus elections

Note: This list was last updated in March 2025, with approximately 100 American colleges and universities listed. If you know of a college or university that uses RCV that is not listed on this page, please contact us at [email protected]. 

American University (Washington, DC) — Founded in 1893, American University is located in the nation’s capital and serves more than 14,000 students from all 50 states and 124 countries. The school was designed to train future public servants and has a reputation for forward-thinking political change. In Fall 2020, AU adopted RCV for all student elections and implemented it in the spring of 2021,empowering students with more choice in elections. Today, all student executive positions, including president, are elected with RCV. See American University Student Government Constitution and Bylaws.

Amherst College (Amherst, MA) — Amherst College, located in Massachutts’ “pioneer valley,” uses RCV for its student elections. Additionally, students used RCV in 2019 to select their new mascot, the Mammoths. See Association of Amherst Students Constitution.

Arizona State University (Tempe, AZ) — Representing the academic interests of over 3,000 faculty, ASU’s Academic Assembly uses RCV to elect some of its officers. ASU’s main campus in Tempe, home to more than 50,000 students, also began using RCV in Spring 2021 to elect all student executive positions. See ASU Election Bylaws.

Auburn University (Auburn, AL) — In 2019, Auburn students overwhelmingly (71%) backed a ballot referendum proposing RCV for executive offices in student government elections. The school, comprising some 30,000 students, implemented it in 2020.

Beloit College (Beloit, WI) — Beloit College is one of the country’s top liberal arts colleges comprising a little under 1,000 students. In 2022 the college decided to implement ranked choice voting in their Academic Senate elections. 

Binghamton University (Binghamton, NY) — Home to more than 18,000 students across four campuses, Binghamton is the top-ranked public university in New York state. In Spring 2021, Binghamton — a large and active research university — adopted and used RCV for student government elections with two or more candidates running.

Boise State University (Boise, ID) — The associated students of Boise State have used ranked choice voting to elect student senators since 2022. Student elections typically have low turnout, with only 12.3% of those eligible voting in Spring of 2024, and several positions being vacant due to lack of candidates. 

Boston University (Boston, MA) — Home to 34,000 students. In Spring 2020, BU’s student government adopted proportional RCV to give students more power in electing executive board positions. See a student op-ed endorsing RCV and the 2021 election bylaws.

Bowdoin College (Brunswick, ME) — After a series of crowded class council elections where the plurality winner captured less than 20% of the vote, the Bowdoin Student Government (BSG) adopted RCV for all elections in Spring 2019 —  the first college in the state to do so. In elections since, RCV has ensured that winners have broader support from the student body. See coverage of the change to RCV and coverage of Fall 2020 elections. 

Brigham Young University (Provo, UT) — The BYU Student Association implemented ranked choice voting for its elections starting in 2023.

Brooklyn College (Brooklyn, NY) — Home to roughly 17,000 undergraduates, Brooklyn College, part of the CUNY system, uses RCV to elect student government offices. See the College’s bylaws.

Brown University (Providence, RI) — A prestigious member of the “Ivy League”, Brown has an active civic scene. Spring 2024 elections saw controversy as a disallowed “ticket” voting guide was circulated by Brown Divest Coalition. Brown has used ranked choice voting to elect its Undergraduate Council of Students president since 2022, and as of 2024 uses RCV to elect all three branches of student government. See coverage from the 2024 elections.

Cal Poly Humboldt (Arcata, CA) — Around 8,000 undergraduates use RCV to elect both council representatives and executive officers, including president and vice president. HSU’s Associated Students first used the system in Spring 2014, after the president won in 2013 on a platform of support for RCV and continues to be used today based on the Associated Student’s elections code.

California Institute of Technology (Pasadena, CA) — CalTech boasts 32 Nobel Laureates, 57 National Medal of Science recipients and an RCV system that represents over 2,200 students. CalTech’s student association uses RCV to elect their vice president, the board of control secretary, the Interhouse Committee chairperson and the Conduct Review Committee Student Chair of the Associated Students of California Institute of Technology (ASCIT).

California Polytechnic State University (San Luis Obispo, CA) — Ranked 9th in the West by America’s Best Colleges guidebook, Cal Poly has a long tradition of taking a “Learn by Doing” approach to education, a hands-on and thorough learning method that extends to its student governance. Cal Poly students use RCV to elect their student government president. Students adopted RCV in 2007 to create a “more efficient voting system,” and it is still present in their election code.

California State University, Fullerton (Fullerton, CA) —  CSU Fullerton has some 35,000 students. Associated Students Incorporated has used RCV to elect it’s student President and Vice president since 2020.

California State University at Northridge (Northridge, CA) — Every year, over 36,000 CSUN students use RCV to elect president and vice president of the Associated Students. See the Associated Students Elections Code and coverage of 2018 elections 

Carnegie Mellon University (Pittsburgh, PA) — Carnegie Mellon, a private research institution in Pittsburgh,student government uses proportional RCV for its student government elections. See coverage in The Tartan and the student government by-laws.

Claremont McKenna College (Claremont, CA) — Renowned as one of the nation’s top liberal arts colleges, Claremont McKenna prides itself on providing a liberal arts education as well preparation for a life of leadership. The Associated Students of Claremont McKenna uses RCV to elect president, vice president, class president, and council chairs for social, dormitory, and student life affairs. See Associated Students of Claremont McKenna College Constitution and 2023 election results.

Clark University (Worcester, MA) — Established in 1887, Clark University was the first modern research university in the United States. Located in Worcester, Massachusetts, Clark University uses RCV in undergraduate student council elections.  

Colby College (Waterville, ME) — Founded in 1813, Colby College is one of the oldest liberal arts colleges in the United States and home to over 2,000 students from 70 different countries. Following the success of RCV in state and federal primaries and general elections in Maine, Colby students used RCV for the first time in 2021 to vote for class presidents and class Senators. Colby’s Student Government Association unanimously voted in Fall 2020 to use RCV in all future student elections.

Colorado College (Colorado Springs, CO) — On September 1, 2022, the Full Council of the Colorado College Student Government Association approved RCV elections with 3 rankings.

Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) — The student senate passed a bill in 2023 to use ranked choice voting to elect the president, vice president, and speaker of the Senate.

Columbia University (New York, NY) — Columbia was founded in 1754, making it the oldest institution of higher education in New York and the fifth-oldest in the United States. Columbia’s Senate represents faculty, students and other constituencies. For several years, it has used RCV to represent the full scope of voter preference in electing its members.

Cornell University (Ithaca, NY) — Cornell uses RCV to elect two student members to its Board of Trustees. The position itself is unique; Cornell is one of only a handful of universities with two students, two faculty members, and one employee as full members of the board. Cornell’s Student Assembly also uses RCV to elect student body president and executive vice president, and uses proportional RCV for some other offices. See 2023 election results.

Duke University (Durham, NC) — Duke takes the lead in more than just NCAA basketball standings. The Blue Devils are also leaders in student democracy, using RCV to represent over 14,000 students in student government elections. Duke’s student government adopted the system in 2004 for its executive elections and has since expanded the practice to all elective positions. RCV has proven to be an effective and practical method of electing student leaders, contributing to high-turnout elections. In 2017, Duke had a higher turnout rate for campus elections than other peer institutions. See 2024 Presidential Election Results and Duke election bylaws.

Eastern Carolina University (Greenville, NC) — In 2024, Eastern Carolina University adopted RCV for student body elections.

Emory University, Oxford College (Oxford, GA) – The Oxford College Student Government Association’s first use of RCV in presidential and vice-presidential elections on April 3, 2025 saw a more than a 40% increase in voter turnout. All subsequent elections will use RCV. 

Florida State University (Tallahassee, FL) — Florida State University (FSU), is designated as a preeminent university in Florida and is one of the most respected learning and research institutions in the county. In January of 2022, FSU implemented instant runoff voting for on campus, non-executive offices as stated in the Student Body Election Code.

George Mason University (Fairfax, VA) — GMU is the largest public university in Virginia, with an undergraduate population of 35,000. The student council voted in 2023 to adopt RCV in the student President and Vice President elections, and held its first election with a ranked ballot in 2024. 

The George Washington University (Washington, DC) — Chartered by an act of Congress in 1821, GW is now home to more than 26,000 students from all 50 states and 130 countries. The school sits in the nation’s capital and has a tradition of political activism that has permeated its own electoral system. GW’s Student Association held its first RCV election for president and executive vice president in Spring 2020. See this interview and coverage from elections in 2020 and 2024.

Georgetown University (Washington, DC) — Georgetown is one of the most prestigious private universities in the country. Since 2006, it has used RCV in single-seat student elections. In 2013, it adopted a fair representation system for legislative elections. The benefits of RCV were on full display in the Student Association’s 2014 presidential election, when each of the four tickets used cross-endorsements to advance their mutual interests. After the leading ticket finished the first round with only 35% of the vote, two more rounds ensured that students were represented by the candidate with the broadest support. See the 2019 election results.

Georgia Institute of Technology (Atlanta, GA) – Georgia Tech, a public research and technology university, uses RCV for all elections. The Student Government Association lays out these guidelines in their Elections Code. See coverage of the 2023 elections

Georgia State University (Atlanta, GA) — Spread across six campuses, Georgia State is a leading public research university. In February 2021, GSU’s Senate voted unanimously to adopt RCV for all future elections to replace an inefficient runoff process and ensure every student’s voice was heard. See Georgia State Voting Instructions.

Greenfield Community College (Greenfield, MA) — Greenfield Community College, home to several hundred students, adopted ranked choice voting for its Student Senate in 2021.

Grinnell College (Grinnell, IA) — Grinnell is a Midwestern liberal arts and sciences school that prioritizes self-governance and personal responsibility, which is demonstrated by its use of its own RCV software. The Student Government Association recently added RCVin an attempt to increase voter turnout and encourage candidates to run for office. See coverage of the 2021 elections.

Harvard University (Cambridge, MA) — The oldest institution of higher education in the United States, Harvard is dedicated to excellence and innovation and also has one of the longest histories with RCV. Harvard’s Undergraduate Student Association uses RCV to elect its co-presidents. The Graduate Dormitory Council, the Graduate Music Forum, and the Graduate Student Council each use RCV in internal executive position elections. Harvard Law School also uses RCV for its elections. See the Harvard Law School Bylaws Article VII and coverage of the 2023 elections.

Haverford College (Haverford, PA) — Located outside Philadelphia, Haverford is known for its unique Honor Code and strong liberal arts education. In 2023, Haverford students successfully passed RCV for all elected officials after candidates were winning elections without a majority of votes.

Hendrix College (Conway, AR) — At just over 1,400 students, Hendrix is a small liberal arts college in Arkansas. Its Student Senate saw voter participation double after RCV was implemented in 2003. The school has since used the system for all student association elections. See Hendrix College Election Code Article II, Section 5.

James Madison University (Harrisonburg, VA) — With over 20,000 undergraduate students, JMU is a public research university in Harrisonburg, Virginia. In April 2020, JMU’s Student Government Association (SGA) passed a resolution to express its intent to shift SGA elections, both internal and external, to RCV which has taken effect based on the school’s election policies.

Kansas State University (Manhattan, KS) — Kansas State University has some of the highest number of national scholars in a public university. In 2022 the university adopted RCV for their Student Government Association. See FAQs on Student Government Association’s website about instant run-off voting and 2022 coverage about transitioning to RCV.

Kenyon College (Gambier, OH) — Kenyon is a residential, liberal arts school with over 1,600 undergraduate students. It is scheduled to use RCV in the next election featuring more than two candidates. 

Lawrence University (Appleton, WI) — Ranking among the Ivies in Newsweek’s list of most rigorous colleges, Lawrence takes academics and elections seriously. The school’s Community Council first used RCV in 2012. As a result, the university has seen a significant increase in voting participation. See this coverage from past elections.

Louisiana State University (Baton Rouge, LA) — In Fall 2020, LSU adopted RCV (including both single-winner and proportional RCV) for all student elections. A referendum on the initiative passed with 64% of the student vote, and student elections began to use RCV in Spring 2021. See how RCV helped elect the first female Student Body President in 15 years.

Louisiana State University Law Center (Baton Rouge, LA) — Boasting five National Moot Court Championships since 2005, the LSU Law Center is known for smart competitions in the courtroom and at the ballot box. Recognized by National Jurist as the country’s third “best value” law school, LSU Law Center’s Student Bar Association uses RCV elections according to its election code.

Loyola Marymount University (Los Angeles, CA) — Loyola Marymount’s 9,000 students use RCV to elect their president and vice president based on the election code. Loyola Marymount’s Associated Students elections have drawn extremely high turnout; in 2014, it broke records, with over 51% of the student body voting. See this coverage from past elections, including a 2014 race with record-breaking turnout.

Luther College (Decorah, IA) — Since implementing RCV in 2003, Luther’s student government has expanded RCV from executive elections to the Student Senate according to their student government bylaws.

Macalester College (St. Paul, MN) — Located in St. Paul, Minnesota, which uses RCV in its municipal elections, Macalester is one of the nation’s most reputable liberal arts colleges that uses RCV to elect its Executive Board and Issue-Based Officers. Its 2014 presidential election was decided after five rounds of voting — and one of the school’s highest voter turnout rates on record. See the student government election results page and coverage from the 2014 elections.

Marquette University (Milwaukee, WI) — In elections for president and vice president, the student government at Milwaukee University uses RCV. According to the student newspaper, The Marquette Tribune, the change was aimed at increasing turnout. Marquette’s first RCV elections in 2014 saw an increase in turnout, with 22.3% of Marquette’s 8,300 students voting. See the student government election rules and coverage from past elections.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA) — Regarded as a leader in science and information technology, MIT also became an innovator in student elections by adopting RCV in 2014. MIT students use RCV in all student government elections, including president, vice president, class councils, and Student Senate. See the Undergraduate Association election code.

Metropolitan State University of Denver (Denver, CO) – Members of the Student Advocacy Council are elected using a single-transferable vote system which allows voters to rank the candidates. See information about 2023 spring elections.

Miami University (Oxford, OH) — Home to nearly 25,000 students, Miami is ranked among the best public research universities in the country. After years of declining turnout in runoff elections, Miami switched to RCV for all Associated Student Government elections. See coverage of Miami’s switch to RCV and the student government bylaws.

New Jersey Institute of Technology (Newark, NJ) – Representing over 13,000 students, NJIT’s Student Senate chose to adopt the proportional form of ranked choice voting, also known as single transferable vote, for its 2025 elections.

Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) — Located in the suburbs of Chicago, Northwestern is regarded as one of the nation’s most prestigious research universities, with particular strengths in the social sciences. The school’s Associated Student Government Senate passed RCV in 2022. See the Associated Student Government Code.

Oregon State University (Corvallis, OR) — Oregon State’s Associated Students represent the interests of a massive student body. To ensure that all voices are heard, the student association switched to RCV in 2014 to increase voter turnout. They met their goal, and then some. In its first election using RCV, turnout was 62% higher than in the previous election. See 2022 election results.

Peru State (Peru, NE) — Peru State is a public college with about 2,400 students. In addition to being the first college in Nebraska, Peru State became the first to use RCV in the state when its Peru Association of Student Athletes (PASA) used RCV for its officer elections in Spring 2020. 

Pitzer College (Claremont, CA) — A small liberal arts college in Los Angeles, Pitzer emphasizes social justice, intercultural understanding and environmental sensitivity. One of Pitzer’s core values is “meaningful participation of students, faculty and staff in college governance and academic program design.” In 2009, the school adopted RCV in Student Senate elections to give students more meaningful participation in student elections. See the Student Senate constitution and Spring 2016 election results.

Pomona College (Claremont, CA) — This well regarded liberal arts college uses RCV to elect its student government officials for its Associated Students. Along with Pitzer and Claremont McKenna, Pomona is one of three Claremont Colleges that use RCV. See the Associated Students election code.

Princeton University (Princeton, NJ) — Home to more than 5,000 undergraduate students from nearly 50 countries, Princeton is one of the oldest and most prestigious institutions of higher education in the United States. In 2019, Princeton’s Senate adopted RCV for the election of all executive and class Officers, becoming the first school in New Jersey to adopt RCV. Since then, its student government has successfully run multiple elections using RCV; turnout increased to more than 15%, allowing students to cast more meaningful votes. See this constitutional amendment and the Spring 2020 election results.

Purdue University (West Lafayette, IN) — Founded in 1869, Purdue is home to more than 50,000 students. Purdue is a public research university and has been ranked among the five most innovative schools in the United States. In Spring 2021, Purdue adopted RCV for all of their student government elections. See this news coverage of RCV at Purdue.

Reed College (Portland, OR) — Reed is known as one of West Coast’s top liberal arts colleges and famously houses a student-run nuclear reactor on campus. The Reed Student Senate is distinguished for its voting system: Presidential and vice presidential elections are conducted using RCV, and proportional RCV is used to elect other student leaders.

Rice University (Houston, TX) — The Rice Student Association uses RCV for single-winner elections. With over 6,000 students, Rice elects a student president for each of its 10 colleges. One recent election for president featured six candidates. RCV is also used to elect members of the Rice Faculty Council. See the Student Association Constitution and these results from past elections.

Santa Fe College (Gainesville, FL) — Located in Gainesville, Florida, Santa Fe College became the first community college in the nation to adopt RCV for student government executive officers (president, vice president, secretary, treasurer) in 2008. Over 17,000 students on two campuses and six centers are able to participate in online elections. See the Student Government Constitution and coverage of Santa Fe’s transition to RCV.

Seattle University School of Law (Seattle, WA) — The legal writing program at this Pacific Northwest law school is ranked first in the country by U.S. News and World Report, and the Student Bar Association is similarly innovative. The SBA adopted RCV for executive and legislative offices, which are elected annually. See the Student Bar Association Bylaws.

Sewanee: University of the South (Sewanee, TN) — In 2019, the University of the South started using RCV for single-seat positions, including the president, Student Government Association president, and student trustee. The change was adopted in early 2018 in response to low turnout and the burden of a runoff election when no candidate received a majority of votes.

Stanford University (Stanford, CA) — One of the most prestigious universities in the United States, Stanford has used RCV to elect its Associated Students executive officers and class presidents since 2001. Close to 3,500 students participated in the multi round 2013 presidential election.

Syracuse University (Syracuse, NY) — The student association at Syracuse University passed a bill in February of 2022 that will change their voting system to RCV to elect the President, Executive Vice-President, and Comptroller. See the University’s Election Code.

Texas A&M University (College Station, TX) — When it comes to voter representation, Texas A&M students have a clear message: Don’t mess with Texas. Representing 58,000 students, the fourth largest student body in the United States, the Student Government Association introduced RCV in 2013 and has used it since for its senate elections. See the Student Government Association Code and 2023 election results.

Tufts University (Medford, MA) — Located outside Boston, Tufts is consistently ranked among the nation’s top schools, and the Tufts Community Union (TCU) represents more than 5,000 undergraduates. Since 2003, presidential elections, TCU, and Senate in-house elections have been conducted with RCV. See results from the 2023 TCU election.

University of California at Berkeley (Berkeley, CA) — A bastion of progressive change, UC-Berkeley adopted RCV long ago. In 1967, the Associated Students of the University of California adopted RCV (which it calls “alternative vote”) for executive officer elections and proportional RCV for Senate elections. See the Associated Students elections guide and 2023 election results.

University of California at Davis (Davis, CA) — UC Davis has a student body of over 30,000 and the largest campus in the UC system. Since 2005, students have elected the president and  vice president of the Associated Students using RCV. The school’s Law Students Association also uses RCV. See Election bylaws and 2023 election results.

University of California at Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA) — UCLA has over 31,000 undergraduate students, the Undergraduate Student Association uses RCV to elect all officers. For general representative seats, UCLA uses proportional RCV. UCLA’s graduate student association also uses RCV to elect officers; turnout dramatically increased in 2014. See Election code and 2020 election results.

University of California at Santa Barbara (Santa Barbara, CA) — UCSB may be known for its scenic coastal location in Southern California, but it was also an early adopter of RCV. UC Santa Barbara’s Associated Students have used RCV for all executive offices since 2001, and adopted proportional RCV in 2015. See Associated Students Constitution, coverage of adoption of Multi-Seat RCV, and 2022 election results.

University of California at Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz, CA) – In Spring 2020, UCSC implemented RCV in government elections for the university’s 20,000 undergraduate students. See 2020 Student Union Assembly Constitutional Amendment.

University of Colorado Boulder (Boulder, Colorado) – In fall of 2022, CU’s student body legislature switched from approval voting to RCV after facing issues with the approval system. Their spring 2024 election code confirms RCV as an option for elections, though exact rules are approved from year to year. See Spring 2024 CUSG Election Codes.

University of Denver (Denver, CO) — After a spring 2023 debate between USG Presidential candidates, the Elections Commissioner announced the implementation of ranked choice voting for future elections.

University of Houston (Houston, TX) — After a mass disqualification in their 2021 SGA elections, the student government changed their election code to use ranked choice voting for their elections.

The University of Illinois (Chicago, IL) — Starting in their 2020 elections, the University of Illinois used RCV to elect executive officers. See coverage of 2023 election results with RCV.

University of Iowa (Iowa City, IA) — With over 30,000 students, UI has used RCV since 2008 to elect its student government president, vice president and senators. In the first RCV election, voter turnout jumped to record-breaking levels.

University of Kentucky (Lexington, KY) — After the fall of 2021, more than 30,000 switched their election system to ranked choice voting. Undergraduate and Graduate Senator At-Large races elected in this way.

University of Maryland at Baltimore County (Baltimore, MD) — Established as a part of the University of Maryland System in 1966, UMBC serves over 14,000 students and specializes in the natural sciences and engineering, while also offering programs in the liberal arts and social sciences. In 2016, UMBC students voted by a two-to-one margin to use RCV to elect executive officers in future elections for their Student Government Association. See Election bylaws and 2023 election results.

University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI) – UM voted overwhelmingly in March 2020 to adopt RCV in its Central Student Government (CSG) presidential election, with first implementation in November 2022. See Governing Documents for the Central Student Government.

University of Minnesota (St. Paul and Minneapolis, MN) — The flagship of Minnesota’s university system, UMTC enrolls some 53,000 students on campuses in St. Paul and Minneapolis, both of which use RCV for municipal elections. Perhaps not surprisingly, U of M’s Student Association also uses RCV. More than 5,000 students used RCV to elect the 2013-2014 president and vice president of the Minnesota Student Association. See Election bylaws.

University of Montana (Missoula, MT) – The student government passed a bill in 2023 to elect its president and vice president with ranked choice voting, eliminating the need for a primary that had traditionally narrowed the field to two choices.

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Chapel Hill, NC) – This flagship North Carolina school revived instant runoff voting in 2017 after a hiatus tied to a decision in the state legislature to repeal its use. The school’s nearly 19,000 students use a single “instant” runoff to elect their student body president instead of a two-part runoff. See the election bylaws.

The University of North Carolina at Charlotte (Charlotte, NC) – In the spring of 2022, UNC at Charlotte voted to implement Single Transferable Voting (STV) and Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) for elections of the student government. See the act here.

University of Oregon (Eugene, OR) — Over 90% of student voters approved a ballot measure to implement ranked choice voting in elections for student government. See the full text of the ballot measure and results here.

University of Rhode Island (Kingston, RI) — The Student Senate President and Vice President are elected using ranked choice voting. Read the Student Senate Report on the 2023 elections.

University of San Diego School of Law (San Diego, CA) — Renowned for its programs in tax law and public interest practice, USD Law elects several of its student officers using RCV. With an enrollment of about 1,000 students, the Student Bar Association uses RCV to elect its president, vice president, vice president of organizations, treasurer, secretary and American Bar Association chair and vice chair.

University of Southern California (Los Angeles, CA) — The undergraduate student government uses ranked choice voting for its elections. Read about the adoption of RCV in 2023.

University of Texas at Austin (Austin, TX) — After a series of low-turnout, high-drama runoffs, UT-Austin’s student government signed off in 2018 on a switch to proportional RCV. As approved, the campus’ 50,000+ students began using this method to elect student government leaders in 2019, consolidating the prior two-part system into a single “instant” runoff. See the campus-wide election code.

University of Tulsa (Tulsa, OK) — TU used ranked choice voting as of its 2026 student government association elections.

University of Utah (Salt Lake City, UT) — In 2026, students voted to adopt RCV in student association elections.

University of Virginia (Charlottesville, VA) — UV adopted RCV in 2003. “After many irregularities during past elections, Student Council and the University conducted two investigations/reports to propose a solution to the problems seen in runoffs in student elections over the past few years.” The university’s Board of Elections also staged a mock 2004 U.S. presidential race using RCV. See Election bylaws and 2023 election results.

University of Washington (Seattle, WA) — With over 40,000 students, representing the interests of UW students is no small task. But the Associated Students of the University of Washington has made it possible by using RCV to elect their officers since 2006. Students believe so strongly in RCV that some think it should expand across the country. See Associated Students elections code and 2023 election results.

University of Wyoming (Laramie, WY) — With an undergraduate population of about 10,000 students, this public university is located in Laramie. The Associated Students of UW uses IRV in its elections.

Utah State University (Logan, UT) — Utah State University first implemented ranked choice voting in 2023. Read coverage of the university’s RCV adoption in The Utah Statesman.

Utah Valley University (Orem, UT) — Home to more than 40,000 students, Utah Valley University has one of the largest undergraduate enrollments in the United States. The school is the largest public university in Utah and draws students from all 50 states, Washington, D.C., and 74 countries. As of Spring 2021, all student elections are held with ranked choice voting.

Vanderbilt University (Nashville, TN) — Ranked among the 15 best colleges and universities in the nation by U.S. News and World Report, Vanderbilt is a large research university and home to over 7,000 undergraduate students. In 2020, Vanderbilt’s student government implemented proportional RCV for its Senate elections to ensure students have a greater say in outcomes. See this 2020 election coverage.

Vassar College (Poughkeepsie, NY) — In September 2002, Vassar’s Student Association voted nearly unanimously to adopt RCV. In 2004, proportional RCV and the single transferable vote method of fair representation voting were used for the first time to elect representatives for the freshman council, campus committees, and president. See 2022 election report.

Washington and Lee (Lexington, VA) — A private liberal arts school in Virginia, Washington and Lee is the alma mater of a number of U.S. Supreme Court justices and Pulitzer Prize and Emmy award winners. In 2018, the student government elected to use RCV in all future elections.

Wellesley College (Wellesley, MA) — Established in 1870, Wellesley is a highly regarded private women’s liberal arts college with notable alumni, including Hillary Rodham Clinton and Madeleine Albright. Wellesley College uses RCV for their academic council committee elections. See the Academic Council Voting Process.

Wesleyan University (Middletown, CT) — Founded in 1831, Wesleyan is one of America’s oldest and most prestigious liberal arts colleges. Home to 3,000 students, Wesleyan prides itself on its scholarly culture and illustrious history of notable alumni. After years of declining turnout in student body elections, the school’s Student Assembly voted unanimously in March 2021 to adopt RCV for all future elections. “The whole campus should get a say in who’s going to lead the student government, and to incentivize that, I think a ranked choice voting system is the best way to go,” George Fuss, Chair of the Community Committee, said. 

Western Washington University (Bellingham, WA) — In 2012, WWU adopted RCV for its elections. For many years, the Student Senate has used RCV to elect its vice chair and parliamentarian. See Election Code.

Williams College (Williamstown, MA) — This small liberal arts college was founded in 1793 in Western Massachusetts. It serves about 2,000 students. The Williams Council uses RCV for all elections, using Big Pulse.

Worcester Polytechnic Institute (Worcester, MA) — Founded in 1865, Worcester Polytechnic Institute is a research university in Worcester, Massachusetts. The private institution uses RCV for faculty committee elections. 

Yale University (New Haven, CT) — Ranked choice voting is used to choose the president and vice president of the undergraduate Yale College Council, and for members of the Executive Board of the Yale Democrats. See this 2023 election coverage.

Other Student and University Uses of RCV

International Health Economics Association (IHEA) (Toronto, Ontatrio Canada) — The IHEA seeks to increase communication among health economists and foster a higher standard of debate in the application of economics to healthcare systems. In 2021, the IHEA used instant runoff voting to elect their executive Board. 

Columbia Faculty Assocation (New York, NY) — The A&S Faculty Senators in the University Senate used ranked instant runoff voting to elect faculty senators. 

The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) — The ASCCC adopted ranked-choice voting to elect members of their executive committee. This change, spanning across 115 California community colleges, was made in an effort to “significantly expedite the elections process” which often “require[s] multiple runoff elections.”

The impacts of ranked choice voting

Representative outcomes and majority rule

RCV gives voters backup choices and delivers majority winners in crowded fields. 

In elections with more than two candidates, one can win over strong opposition of most voters. Sometimes this happens in races for top executive offices. In Maine, for example, nine of 11 gubernatorial elections between 1994 and 2014 were won with less than 50% of votes, including three with less than 40%. (This spurred Maine voters to adopt RCV in 2016 and 2018.)

In RCV elections, if no candidate wins a majority of first choices, those in last place are eliminated one by one. If a voter’s first choice is eliminated, their vote instantly goes to their next choice. This avoids vote-splitting and upholds majority rule.

Incentivizes positive campaigning

In non-RCV elections, candidates benefit from mudslinging and attacking opponents instead of sharing their positive vision with voters. This drives increasingly toxic and polarizing campaigns. 

With RCV, candidates compete for second-choice support from their opponents’ supporters, which lessens the incentive to run negative campaigns. In RCV contests, candidates do best when they reach out positively to as many voters as possible, including those who support their opponents.

Voters in RCV cities report more positive campaigning. See our Data on RCV page for more on evidence of increased campaign civility and voter engagement.

More voter choice 

American democracy is strongest when all voices are heard. 

To prevent vote-splitting — which often elects candidates who have little support — political operatives take efforts to limit the number of candidates who run. This manifests in several ways:

  • In some places, low-turnout preliminary elections eliminate most candidates.
  • In other places, restrictive ballot access laws keep challengers out.
  • Candidates are pressured by operatives to stay out of the race for fear of splitting the vote with another similar candidate. This often happens to candidates from underrepresented groups in elected office, such as people of color and women.

RCV allows more than two candidates to compete without fear that like-minded candidates will split the vote. 

Saves money when replacing preliminaries or runoffs

Many local offices are elected in two rounds. In some cases, a preliminary election winnows the field to two and is followed by a general election. In other cases, a general election follows a runoff election if no candidate won a majority. 

In either case, the election that takes place on a day other than the general often draws weak and unrepresentative turnout. First-round elections, meanwhile, raise concerns about vote splitting and the possibility of disenfranchising military and overseas voters. 

These problems are not present with RCV. Jurisdictions enjoy the benefits of two rounds of voting in a single, more representative, higher-turnout election, also known as “instant runoff voting.” 

In this context, RCV saves taxpayers a lot of money — the entire cost of a second election — while promoting majority rule and civil campaigning. This is why San Francisco, Minneapolis and more than two dozen other jurisdictions now use RCV. 

New York City saves an estimated $20 million each cycle where RCV avoids a runoff and San Francisco saves an estimated $3 million.

Broader representation

In multiwinner contests, proportional RCV allows diverse groups of voters, whether ideologically or demographically, to elect their candidates of choice. Even in single-winner races, RCV promotes the representation of historically underrepresented groups.

Visit our Data on RCV page to learn more about reflective representation in single-winner contests.

Visit our Proportional RCV page to learn more about how RCV improves representation in multiwinner contests.

Minimizes strategic voting

Ideally, voters vote for candidates they support, not against those they oppose most. In most cases with our current election system, voters often feel the need to vote for the “lesser of two evils” because they believe their favorite candidate is less likely to win. 

With RCV, voters can rank candidates in order of choice. They know that if their first choice doesn’t win, their vote automatically counts for their next choice. This frees voters from worrying about how others will vote and which candidates are more or less likely to win.

Increased participation from military and overseas voters

Deployed military and other overseas voters face challenges during runoff elections and presidential nominating contests, largely because of their timing. We must protect their right to vote.

Federal law requires states to provide military and overseas voters with ballots at least 45 days before federal elections, but runoff elections require a new set of ballots. Sending a second set of ballots significantly delays the runoff and drives down turnout. 

Further, in presidential primaries and caucuses, many candidates withdraw after the first few primaries, before military and overseas ballots can be counted. Subsequent primaries may receive military and overseas ballots cast for candidates no longer in the race.

With RCV, military and overseas voters rank candidates on a single ballot. If a runoff occurs, or if candidates drop out of a presidential contest, the ranked ballot applies. 

Six states use RCV ballots to include overseas and military voters in federal and some state runoff elections: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina. In addition, Springfield, Illinois, has adopted this reform for local races.

Improves presidential primaries

Ranked choice voting makes presidential primaries fairer, promotes nominees with broad support, and ensures every voter’s voice is heard. Ranked choice voting is uniquely well-suited to address problems in presidential primaries and caucuses. 

In crowded presidential fields that often draw 15 or more competitors, candidates are pressured to drop out to avoid splitting the vote, and voters may vote strategically rather than support their true favorite. With RCV, more candidates can remain in the race, and voters can rank their favorites in honest order of preference. 

Even so, candidates frequently drop out through the presidential primary season, and many Americans cast their ballots for a candidate who withdraws before their state’s primary day. This is especially common for early and absentee voters. Ranked choice voting solves this problem by allowing voters to rank backup choices. If a voter’s first-choice candidate drops out, their ballot simply still counts for their next choice.

In the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, over 3 million votes were cast for Democratic candidates who had already withdrawn from the race, representing over 8% of total votes. Over 700,000 Republican primary voters cast these “zombie votes” in 2016, and over 300,000 Republican primary voters cast zombie votes in 2024. See info on the number of zombie votes by state here.

Additionally, some states hold caucuses instead of primaries, asking voters to spend hours of their time at in-person meetings with multiple rounds of voting. Ranked choice voting simulates an “instant A caucus is a meeting of supporters or members of a specific political party or movement. Some states use in-person caucuses to select delegates for presidential elections, rather than party primaries. The word caucus can also sometimes refer to a group of like-minded people, such as the Congressional Black Caucus.Caucus” – allowing voters to realign if their top choice loses, without the high burden and low turnout associated with caucuses.

See which states have used RCV in presidential primaries here, and read FairVote’s reports on RCV in the 2020 and 2024 presidential primaries. 

Strengthens party nominees

In addition to solving problems unique to presidential primaries, RCV can help parties nominate strong candidates in a wide range of elections. Research shows that candidates who win their primaries with a majority of votes are more likely to win the general election; RCV is the most efficient way to deliver majority winners in primaries.

Additionally, because RCV rewards positive campaigning, there are fewer negative attacks and the party’s voters are more likely to enter the general election enthusiastic and united behind the nominee. Voters in RCV primaries report having more positive views of the candidates than voters in choose-one primaries.

Virginia Republicans have seen these benefits in practice: The party used RCV to nominate its statewide slate of candidates in 2021, and went on to sweep all three races in a state where the party had not won statewide since 2009.

Ballot measures

Recent ballot measures to adopt ranked choice voting have a track record of success. Visit this page to find information about past and present ballot measure campaigns.

How ranked choice voting works

RCV is straightforward. Voters have the option to rank candidates in order of preference: first, second, third and so forth. If your first choice doesn’t have a chance to win, your ballot counts for your next choice.

How Votes are Counted

All first choices are tallied. If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices, that candidate wins, just like in any other election. 

If there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an “instant runoff.” 

The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who picked that candidate as their top choice will have their vote count for their next choice.

This process continues until there’s a majority winner (i.e. a candidate wins with more than half of the votes).

Try RCV yourself here, or click through the infographic below to see how votes are counted in an RCV election.

Explainer videos

A number of organizations have produced videos explaining RCV and/or advocating for its use. In addition to the video above, here are a few more examples:

What is Ranked Choice Voting? – This FairVote video shows how the single-winner form of ranked choice voting works. A Spanish version can be found here.

Proportional Ranked Choice Voting Explained – This FairVote video shows how the proportional, multi-winner form of FairVote works.

Ranked Choice Voting | What do I need to know? – The New York City Campaign Finance Board created this video to educate voters ahead of the city’s historic implementation of RCV in 2021. The Board also released versions in 13 additional languages.

La votación por orden de preferencia explicada – This Spanish-language video, posted to the Facebook page of Vida y Sabor Magazine, explained RCV leading up to an RCV election in Minneapolis.

How Would Ranked Choice Voting Work in Chicago? – This WTTW News video shows an RCV election to choose the most iconic Chicago food.

Alaska 2022 Election System Overview – This video explains Alaska’s system of open primaries and RCV general elections.

FAQs

1. What is ranked choice voting and what are its benefits?

Ranked choice voting (RCV) ensures elections are fair for all voters. It gives voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference: first, second, third, and so on.

RCV works because it:

  • Promotes more representative outcomes and upholds majority rule
  • Gives voters more choices and a more meaningful vote
  • Allows voters to pick their favorite candidate without worrying about playing “spoiler” or “wasting” their vote. Voters do not need to choose the lesser of two evils. 
  • Rewards elected officials who deliver for a majority of voters
  • Lowers the barrier to entry for women and candidates of color
  • Discourages negative campaigning
  • Saves money by replacing preliminary or runoff elections
  • Increases participation from military and overseas voters
  • Is popular with voters who use it

See this page for more about how RCV improves elections.

2. How does ranked choice voting work?

RCV is simple for voters. Rank candidates in order of preference: first, second, third, and so on. If your first choice doesn’t have a chance to win, your vote counts for your next choice. 

To win a single-winner RCV race, candidates need more than 50% of votes. If a candidate earns more than half of first choices, they win, just like any other election. If no candidate does, the one with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who ranked that candidate first have their vote count for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins more than half of the votes. 

The process is similar in the proportional form of RCV, but the The minimum number of votes needed to win a seat under various Multi-Winner voting methods. In Proportional Ranked Choice Voting, the threshold is the fewest votes that only the winning number of candidates can obtain, typically calculated using the Droop Quota. In List Proportional Representation, the threshold is the minimum needed for a party to win any seats and is known as the threshold of exclusion.Threshold for victory is lower – ensuring both majority rule and minority voice. If a city is electing four people to its city council, for example, each candidate must earn more than 20% of the vote to win a seat. At least 80% of voters will see a candidate they ranked elected to the council.

See How RCV works for more information on how ballots are counted.

3. Is ranked choice voting the same as instant runoff voting / single transferable vote / preference voting / the alternative vote?

Those terms refer to specific forms of RCV. 

Single-winner RCV is also known as:

  • Instant runoff voting (IRV)
  • Alternative vote
  • Preferential voting

Proportional RCV is also known as: 

  • Single transferable vote
  • The Hare system

Other voting methods that use ranked ballots include:

  • Borda count (a point system)
  • Condorcet voting (a method comparing each candidate to every other candidate in head-to-head matchups)
  • Sequential RCV (a multi-winner election comprised of a series of IRV elections)

4. Where is ranked choice voting used?

Alaska, Maine, and dozens of cities and counties use ranked choice voting. See a full list here.

5. How can I help support ranked choice voting?

We’re thrilled you want to support the ranked choice voting movement! The best way to get started is to join an RCV group in your state, or visit the FairVote Action website to find opportunities happening around the country.

6. Can I vote for only one candidate in a ranked choice race?

Yes. You can  rank as many or as few candidates as you like. Your ballot initially counts only for your top choice, no matter how many other candidates you ranked. Voting for just one candidate means that if your first choice is eliminated, your ballot becomes “inactive” and does not count for another candidate in future rounds of counting.

Ranking gives your vote more power – the more candidates you rank, the more voice you have if your favorite doesn’t win.

7. What happens to my favorite candidate if I rank a second choice?

Ranking other candidates does not affect your first choice; it just gives you backup choices if your favorite candidate can’t win.Your vote only counts for your second choice if your first choice can’t win and is eliminated.

8. Is ranked choice voting nonpartisan?

Ranked choice voting is a nonpartisan, party-neutral reform that gives voters better choices and more power in our elections. RCV promotes majority rule and incentivizes candidates to reach out to more voters, rather than just their base.

Candidates from across the political spectrum have won RCV elections. For example, in 2022, Alaska elected a conservative Republican governor, moderate Republican U.S. senator, and moderate Democratic U.S. representative with RCV. Maine has elected Democrats, Republicans, and independents with RCV.

With proportional RCV, Democratic and Republican voters who live in districts that favor the other party are able to earn representation. Voters excluded by winner-take-all elections can gain representation.

9. What kind of candidates win ranked choice voting elections?

To win a ranked choice voting election, candidates need to build a majority coalition. Candidates do best when they have both deep (1st-choice) and broad (backup-choice) support. Polarizing candidates who only appeal to a small base of voters are less likely to win.

RCV doesn’t elect candidates who are “everyone’s second choice,” because candidates with little or no first-choice support won’t advance past the first round of counting.

10. Should I vote for the most electable candidate or the candidate I really want?

The best option under RCV is to vote sincerely; rank your favorite candidate first, your second favorite second, and so on. Ranking a second choice doesn’t affect your top choice. 

Currently, our “choose-one” elections incentivize voters to think strategically, rather than honestly, when voting. 

In the United States, most high-profile elections devolve into contests between two frontrunners — and other candidates are often deemed “spoilers.” Voters must either vote for the “lesser of two evils” or give up their say in the outcome between frontrunners. Two-round runoff elections mitigate this somewhat, but suffer from high costs to taxpayers and large declines in turnout. Moreover, two-round systems may still see strategic voting in the first round to determine who makes it into the runoff. 

RCV resolves these issues. Voters who prefer a candidate who isn’t the frontrunner can sincerely rank that candidate first. If that candidate is in last place and cannot win, they are eliminated, and voters who picked them have their votes count toward their next choice. 

Importantly, ranking a backup choice never hurts your top choice. A voter’s second choice is not counted unless their first choice is eliminated. This effectively removes the incentive to vote strategically. It also means that candidates have no incentive to discourage their supporters from ranking other candidates.

11. Does ranked choice voting require a majority to win?

Yes. In order to win an RCV election, a candidate must win a majority of voters who express a preference between them and their strongest opponent. Some RCV critics fixate on the fact that it is possible for a candidate to win an RCV contest without a majority of votes counted in the first round of counting. This can happen if some voters do not weigh in between the finalist candidates.

However, this should be compared to real-world alternatives. RCV dramatically outperforms “pick-one” elections in promoting majority rule; there is nothing to prevent “pick-one” elections from being won with small percentages like 30% or 40% of the vote.

RCV also outperforms delayed runoff elections, which often see turnout decline so much that the winner earns fewer votes in the runoff than they did in the first round. This happened in 81% of federal primary runoffs in 2024; in 100% of 2024 federal primary runoffs, the winner did not win a majority of first-round votes. In RCV, candidates can never have fewer votes in the final round of counting than in the first round.

12. What are inactive or “exhausted” ballots?

Inactive ballots are any ballots that do not contribute to the outcome between the final two candidates.

Inactive ballots in ranked choice voting elections are equivalent to votes for minor candidates in single-choice elections, or to turnout dropoff in runoff elections, in that some votes do not contribute to the decision between the frontrunners. However, with RCV, voters can vote for their favorite candidate and designate backup choices, increasing the chance that their vote will count in the tally between finalists.

In fact, RCV makes an average of 17% more ballots count in the outcome of the race, not fewer. In contests that actually go to an RCV tabulation, the average increase is 30%.

13. How does ranked choice voting affect voter turnout?

Evidence shows that RCV elections often generate relatively high turnout. 

According to a 2024 study, voters in RCV jurisdictions are 17% more likely to turn out for municipal elections than those in non-RCV jurisdictions. The same study found that voters in RCV jurisdictions are more likely to be contacted by campaigns, an important measure of voter engagement. As one recent example, when New York City used RCV in its 2021 primaries, that election had its highest turnout in over 30 years. 

However, RCV’s full impact on turnout is still not yet known. Most places that have adopted RCV have switched from a two-round system to a single RCV election. Primary and runoff elections often draw low turnout; RCV substantially improves turnout by consolidating primary and runoff elections into a single higher-turnout general election. 

In general elections, turnout is most strongly driven by competitive campaigns and whether the election takes place in an even-numbered year, according to researchers at the University of Missouri-St.Louis. Other characteristics that are independent of the election method, such as media attention, also make it difficult to control for the impact of RCV when studying turnout.

Learn more on our Data on RCV page.

14. How well do voters understand how to use ranked choice voting?

In surveys, voters overwhelmingly report a strong understanding of RCV. Analysis of ballots in RCV jurisdictions demonstrates that voters overwhelmingly rank their choices and make few errors in doing so.

Learn more on our Exit Surveys and Data on RCV pages.

15. Do voters like ranked choice voting?

Yes. Voters in RCV jurisdictions report high levels of satisfaction with the method. After New York City’s first RCV election in 2021, 77% of respondents wanted to use RCV for future elections.

After Santa Fe, New Mexico’s first RCV election in 2018, 94% of voters reported feeling very or somewhat satisfied with RCV. Voters in Portland, Maine, have used RCV to elect their mayor since 2011. In 2020, they expanded RCV to all municipal elections, with 81% in favor.

Learn more on our Exit Surveys page.

16. How does ranked choice voting affect underrepresented groups?

Research shows that with ranked choice voting elections, more women and people of color run for office and win. Cities like New York City, St. Paul (MN), Minneapolis, Las Cruces (NM), and Salt Lake City have elected their most diverse city councils using RCV. Alaska elected its first majority-female State House.

RCV can be used to eliminate primary and runoff elections, both of which draw lower and less representative turnout. It is more welcoming to candidates, allowing all to participate on a level playing field without fear of being deemed “spoilers.” It also incentivizes inclusive campaigns because candidates are rewarded for seeking backup support among voters outside their base.

Learn more in our report on RCV and Communities of Color, and on our Data on RCV page.

17. How much do ranked choice voting elections cost?

When ranked choice voting is used to replace runoffs or preliminary elections, it can save taxpayers thousands or even millions of dollars. For example, New York City saves over $10 million each election cycle by using RCV instead of primary runoff elections.

When a jurisdiction switches to RCV for the first time, it may incur modest start-up costs – such as to upgrade voting equipment or run a voter education campaign. Yet these costs are usually minor; modern voting equipment can run RCV elections at little additional cost, and there are many existing resources that can help with voter education.

As one example, when Maine certified its RCV ballot measure in 2016, some estimated a cost of $1.5 million. The actual cost to implement RCV statewide in 2018 was about $100,000 — less than 10% of the original estimate.To learn more, visit the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center’s budgeting page.

18. Does ranked choice voting affect how candidates run campaigns?

Yes. To win, candidates in RCV elections must appeal to a broad range of voters — their own core supporters as well as other candidates’ supporters. Candidates have fewer incentives to make negative statements about their opponents because negativity risks alienating opponents’ supporters. 

Research shows that voters in cities with ranked choice voting report that they observe less negative campaigning.

Learn more on our Data on RCV page.

19. Have other U.S. jurisdictions used ranked choice voting in the past?

Nearly all U.S. jurisdictions that have used RCV still do. Over the last 50 years, dozens of local jurisdictions have adopted RCV, only four of which have repealed it. The most recent voter repeal took place more than a decade ago. Evidence shows that voters in jurisdictions using RCV support it and want to continue using it.

Challenges to ranked choice voting — in the courts or on the ballot — are often mounted precisely because RCV works. Typically, efforts to repeal RCV come when the system is new, when a candidate loses a close election, or when voters are unhappy about an issue unrelated to RCV. 

These jurisdictions once used RCV but no longer do:

  • Pierce County, Washington, repealed RCV in 2009 after a significant use in 2008. Pierce County switched to “top two” voting along with the rest of Washington when federal courts upheld that method.
  • Aspen, Colorado, repealed RCV after its first use in 2010 after election administration difficulties led to an expensive lawsuit.
  • Two North Carolina cities — Cary and Hendersonville —  briefly adopted RCV under a statewide pilot program that ran from 2007 to 2009. 
  • More than 20 U.S. cities used proportional RCV in the early 20th century, including New York and Cincinnati. All but one repealed RCV by the 1960’s. Proportional RCV saw remarkable success in the United States in the middle of the 20th century, partially due to the success of a similar system in Ireland. Opponents in the 1940s pointed to RCV’s success in electing candidates of diverse ideologies and backgrounds to create insecurity and successfully push for repeal. Of the cities that used RCV in the early 20th century, only one (Cambridge, Massachusetts) has used it without interruption. Another (New York City) passed RCV again.

20. How does ranked choice voting compare to other “alternative” voting reforms? Does it matter which election method is used?

While no voting system is perfect, we believe ranked choice voting is the best one, especially in political elections. 

Single-winner RCV outperforms methods like approval voting, Condorcet methods, and A form of Score Voting which relies on two rounds of tallies to determine a winner. Instead of electing the candidate with the highest score, STAR voting first identifies the candidates with the two highest scores. It then assigns each of those candidates one vote per ballot that scores them higher than the other, and the candidate with the greater number of votes in the second round wins the election. STAR is an acronym for "Score Then Automatic Runoff". Compare and contrast single-winner…STAR Voting in a number of ways. First, RCV has a long history of success in political elections around the world. It’s more than a theory; it works well in practice. Second, RCV promotes majority rule, a key feature that many other methods lack. Third, RCV incentivizes Votes cast by voters for their most preferred candidate. Compare with Strategic Voting.Sincere Voting while other methods create strong opportunities for strategic exploitation. 

To learn more about how single-winner RCV compares to other single-winner voting methods, see our voting methods comparative analysis. 

Additionally, proportional RCV is the right choice for U.S. multi-winner elections because it promotes fair representation while focusing on candidates rather than parties, like some proportional representation methods used in other countries. The American tradition of voting for individual candidates instead of political parties is one that we believe should be preserved. 

RCV works well for both single- and multi-winner elections. For jurisdictions with both, RCV offers a uniform voting method across the board.

21. Does ranked choice voting satisfy the monotonicity criterion?

The monotonicity criterion for ranked voting states that ranking a candidate lower can’t help them, and ranking a candidate higher can’t hurt them. 

Nonmonotonic outcomes mean that a different candidate might have won if some number of voters had ranked the winning candidate lower. Nonmonotonic outcomes are possible in all voting methods in which votes are counted in rounds, including two-round runoff elections and RCV. However, RCV makes strategic exploitation of this possibility virtually impossible.

Take this hypothetical case in a two-round runoff election in which two candidates will advance to the final round. A voter could choose to vote strategically if they were confident that: 

  1. Their favorite candidate would advance to the final round
  2. The race for the second spot in the final round would be a very close race between a candidate who might defeat their favorite candidate and a candidate who would probably lose to their favorite candidate.

The voter may try to help their favorite candidate win the general election by voting for the weaker opponent in the preliminary election. If their assumptions are true and their choice to not vote for their favorite candidate in the first round in fact helped that candidate win in the later round, the result would be nonmonotonic in a two-round runoff system. 

For this property to influence voting, it is not enough that (1) and (2) are true; voters would also have to know they are true. 

We have not identified any RCV election in which any group of voters has attempted to exploit the possibility of nonmonotonicity for strategic purposes. Doing so successfully would require a highly unusual set of circumstances and a detailed and accurate understanding of how the electorate will rank the candidates. Because this is prohibitively difficult, the issue of monotonicity under RCV is largely academic: It has never had any impact on any RCV campaign and is unlikely to have any impact in the future.

There are two known cases of possibly nonmonotonic results in a U.S. RCV election (the 2009 mayoral race in Burlington, Vermont and Alaska’s 2022 special congressional election), but it depends on how strictly one defines the criterion. Learn more on our Data on RCV page.

22. How often does ranked choice voting elect the Condorcet winner?

A Condorcet winner is a candidate who would win a one-on-one matchup against every other candidate in the race. Ranked choice voting does not guarantee that the Condorcet winner will win, but in practice almost always elects the Condorcet winner if one exists. 

Of nearly 500 RCV races in the United States since 2004 where we have full ballot data, the Condorcet candidate has won all but two, for a Condorcet efficiency rate of 99.6% in practice. Learn more about this particular election on our Data on RCV page.

In the rare situation when RCV does not elect the Condorcet winner, that necessarily means that the Condorcet winner attracted too little core support to come in either first or second in the final round of counting.

See this page for information on how single-winner RCV compares to other voting methods in terms of evaluative criteria.

23. Is ranked choice voting constitutional?

Yes. The U.S. Constitution is silent as to the method of election for federal, state and local races. Every time a federal court has heard a challenge to RCV, it has upheld RCV.

The following federal court cases upheld RCV:

  • Hagopian v. Dunlap, 480 F. Supp. 3d 288 (D.Me. 2020) (upholding RCV in Maine)
  • Baber v. Dunlap, 376 F. Supp. 3d 125 (D.Me. 2018) (upholding RCV in Maine)
  • Maine Republican Party v. Dunlap, 324 F. Supp. 3d 202 (D. Me. 2018)(upholding the application of RCV to partisan primaries in Maine)*
  • Dudum v. Arntz, 640 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2011) (upholding RCV in San Francisco

Most state courts have upheld RCV as well – although a few have limited RCV because of conflicting language in their state constitutions. The following state court cases upheld the legality of RCV:

  • Kohlhaas v. State, No. S-18210 (Alaska Oct. 21, 2022) (upholding RCV in Alaska)
  • Maine Senate v. Secretary of State, 2018 Me. 52 (Me. April 17, 2018) (Per curiam) (upholding RCV’s application to Maine’s primary elections)
  • State of New Mexico v. City Council of Santa Fe, Case No. D-101-CV-2017-02778 (N.M. County of Santa Fe, 1st Judicial Dist. Nov. 30, 2017), petition for stay denied, No. S-1-SC-36791 (N.M. Jan. 9, 2018) (upholding RCV in Santa Fe)
  • Minn. Voters Alliance v. City of Minneapolis, 766 N.W.2d 683 (Minn. 2009) (upholding RCV in Minneapolis)
  • McSweeney v. City of Cambridge, 665 N.E.2d 11 (Mass. 1996) (upholding RCV in Cambridge, Massachusetts)
  • Stephenson v. Ann Arbor Bd. of Comm’rs, No. 75-10166 AW (Mich. Cir. Ct. Cnt’y of Jackson 1975) (upholding RCV in Ann Arbor, Michigan)
  • Moore v. Elec. Comm’rs of Cambridge, 309 Mass. 303, 35 N.E.2d 222 (Mass. 1941) (upholding RCV in Cambridge, Massachusetts)
  • Johnson v. City of New York, 9 N.E.2d 30, 33 (N.Y. 1937) (upholding proportional RCV in New York City)
  • Reutener v. City of Cleveland, 141 N.E. 27, 32 (Ohio 1923) (upholding proportional RCV in Cleveland)

24. Does ranked choice voting uphold “one person, one vote”?

Yes, ranked choice voting is a “one person, one vote” system. All voters are treated equally. 

In an RCV election, a ballot counts for one person – the highest-ranked remaining candidate on that ballot. If a voter’s top choice has been eliminated, their ballot counts for their next choice.

The fact that RCV treats every vote equally has been recognized by every court that has examined the issue. For instance, in a unanimous opinion, a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in Dudum v. Arntz:

“In fact, the option to rank multiple preferences is not the same as providing additional votes, or more heavily weighted votes, relative to other votes cast. Each ballot is counted as no more than one vote at each tabulation step, whether representing the voters’ first-choice candidate or the voters’ second- or third-choice candidate, and each vote attributed to a candidate, whether a first-, second- or third-rank choice, is afforded the same mathematical weight in the election. The ability to rank multiple candidates simply provides a chance to have several preferences recorded and counted sequentially, not at once.”

640 F.3d 1098, 1112 (9th Cir. 2011).

Research and data on ranked choice voting in practice

In the United States, dozens of cities, counties, and states, as well as many universities and private organizations, use ranked choice voting in elections. So too do numerous national, state, and local governments around the world. This section explores emerging research into RCV’s impact in the United States and around the world. Click here for more.

Endorsements

Ranked choice voting has drawn widespread support as a sensible solution to problems with our elections. Visit this page to see just some of the elected officials, academic experts, and thought leaders who have endorsed RCV – like Maryland Representative Jamie Raskin, Utah Senator Mitt Romney, scholar Danielle Allen, businessman Mark Cuban, and rock star David Byrne.

FairVote also has a page highlighting editorial boards across the nation that have endorsed RCV.

Election administration with ranked choice voting

FairVote supports election administrators in their goal to make RCV elections as easy as possible for voters and poll workers and ensuring that everyone involved can be confident in the security and accuracy of the results.

Below are key considerations for administrators running RCV elections:

Ballot design

The most critical piece of voter education in an RCV election is the ballot itself: its instructions, how voters record their preferences, and the general design of the ballot. 

Resources:

Releasing RCV election results

FairVote and the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center have analyzed results from hundreds of RCV contests. Based on that experience, we recommend the following tried and true tips:

  1. Release a preliminary round-by-round tally on Election Night
  2. Continue to release preliminary tallies as more votes are counted
  3. Conduct vote total checks with each release of preliminary results
  4. Publish the full ballot record so that anyone can verify the result
  5. Make use of existing tools for visualizing RCV results
  6. Clearly communicate expectations, timelines, and results

Following these best practices – to the extent permitted by state law – can help instill public confidence in the electoral process and its outcome. Currently, the majority of RCV jurisdictions – including Utah, California, and Minnesota cities – release preliminary RCV results the night of or day after the election. 

Read the full report here: Best Practices for Releasing RCV Results

Voting systems

The largest voting systems manufacturers in the U.S. are Elections Systems and Software (ES&S), Dominion, and Hart Intercivic. Modern voting equipment from all three is RCV-capable, along with RCV-readiness from other manufacturers as well.

Resources:

  • RCV Maps from the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center examine the RCV-readiness of voting equipment in every county in the country.
  • RCTab is a federally tested open-source software that can tally RCV election results using cast vote records (CVRs) from most voting system vendors. RCTab is the most comprehensive RCV tabulation module to be tested under the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) and the first open-source software to meet VVSG standards. 

Audits and recounts

Post-election audits are essential for ensuring confidence in the election results. An audit consists of checking a statistically significant sample of ballots to make sure the results are consistent with what the tabulating system reported. Ranked choice voting is compatible with conventional audits and risk-limiting audits.

There have been 15 recounts in RCV elections in the U.S. between 2000 and 2022. Recounts of RCV races typically follow similar procedures to non-RCV recounts, but administrators may need to budget extra time to recount an RCV contest.

Critically, each RCV ballot will only require a single review in determining for whom it should count in all but the most unusual circumstances. Although an initial RCV count is conducted through multiple rounds, the recount generally will not need multiple rounds. The order of elimination for lower-performing candidates doesn’t change the outcome for a close second-place finisher. In an RCV recount, the rankings for candidates placing below the candidate requesting the recount can be ignored, and each ballot should take a single review to determine which of the finalists are ranked higher. Ballots can be sorted based only on which of those top candidates, if any, the ballot supports, and this process will generally conclude the recount.

Resources: