Top-four primary

Last updated

A top-four primary [1] or top-four ranked-choice voting [2] is an election method using a nonpartisan blanket primary where up to four candidates, those with the most votes, advance from a first round of FPTP voting, regardless of the political party. The round two (general) election, held some weeks later, uses instant-runoff voting (IRV, also known as ranked-choice voting, RCV) to confirm a winner among the top set of candidates. [3] [4]

Contents

Its first use was in 2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election. It can be seen as a replacement to the blanket primary which advances only the top-two candidates. It was first advocated by FairVote in 2012 [5] [6] with a statutory model proposed in 2015. [7]

A top-four primary can be seen as a variation of a two-round system where the second round (general election) is always held, even if a candidate gains a majority in the first (primary) round. A candidate receiving 20% of the primary vote is logically guaranteed to pass a top-four primary. [8]

One variation, called Final Five Voting, allows five candidates to pass the open primary. [9]

Usage

Top-four

Alaska

A sample primary ballot. Citizens vote for one candidate per office, by filling in an oval. Candidates are allowed a party label they are registered with, or can identify as nonpartisan, and otherwise they'll be listed as undeclared. Alaska-top4-sample-ballot.png
A sample primary ballot. Citizens vote for one candidate per office, by filling in an oval. Candidates are allowed a party label they are registered with, or can identify as nonpartisan, and otherwise they'll be listed as undeclared.

The 2020 Alaska Measure 2 initiative in Alaska for top-four primary narrowly passed with 50.55% of the vote. [1] It will be used for all state and federal elections except for the president. The Alaskan Independence Party sued, declaring Ballot Measure 2 as unconstitutional. On January 19, 2022, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the measure was constitutional. [10]

The blanket primary is held using first past the post, with voters allowed one vote, and the four candidates with the most votes advancing to the general. The general election ballot allows candidates to be ranked, using Instant-runoff voting elimination to identify a majority winner. The first top-four primary election occurred on August 16, 2022. [11]

For Alaska's 2022 at-large congressional district special election, 48 candidates registered, while only 9 candidates were invited to a first panel discussion: 5 Republicans, 2 Democrats and 2 independents based on various criteria. [12] Despite 48 candidates, the Special election June primary resulted in the top-4 candidates gaining 68.8% of the vote: Sarah Palin 27.01%, Nick Begich, III 19.12%, Al Gross 12.63%, Mary Peltola 10.08%, with the 5th candidate Tara Sweeney at 5.92%. Al Gross withdrew after the primary, and suggested 5th place Sweeney be included in the final ballot, but this was not allowed. [13] [14]

In the general election, Republican votes were split between Palin and Peltola, [15] [16] [17] causing Begich to be eliminated first (despite being preferred by a majority of voters over both other candidates). [18] [19] [20] [21] Votes were then transferred to both Palin and Peltola, resulting in Peltola winning.

Missouri

The Better Elections campaign of Missouri collected 300,000 signature for a Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting for local, state, and Federal Officials, needing 160,199 valid signatures. The initiative would have been voted on in November 2022. [22] [23] [2] However, the signatures needed to be distributed among six congressional districts to qualify, and the campaign did not collect enough in Missouri's 1st District, so the initiative was rejected. [24] [25] The ballot initiative will be attempted again. [26]

Top-five

Petitions sponsored by Katherine M. Gehl and Institute for Political Innovation.

Nevada

Nevada Voters First has a petition for a Top-Five Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative, if enough signatures will appear on the ballot on November 8, 2022. At least 135,561 valid signatures are required by June 21, 2022 for the initiative to make the ballot, with the group backing the voting overhaul announcing it has gathered more than 266,000 signatures. [27]

The initiative would amend the Nevada Constitution to establish open top-five primaries and instant-runoff voting for general elections. It would allow the 35% of voters who are not registered to a party to influence the candidates who advance to the general election. The change would apply to congressional, gubernatorial, state executive offices, and state legislative elections. Supportive legislation would be required for adopted by July 1, 2025. [28]

Benefits

More choices for voters while protecting majority rule
A traditional top-two blanket primary often reduces the field too far, eliminating strong candidates who otherwise deserve attention in the debates and general election.
Not too many choices
Limiting the general election to four candidates helps focus attention to a small set of candidates. In round two (general election) voters only need to rank 3 choices to be able to express a preference between the final two candidates in identifying a majority winner.
In contrast, some municipal elections use instant-runoff voting (IRV) with a single round of voting, remove the primary to save money and give voters more choice in the higher turnout general election [29] however this risks a general election with dozens of candidates, making it harder for voters to know which candidates can win, and which candidates need to be ranked to express a vote among the final two.
All voters help decide who advances
Replacing a closed partisan primary with a blanket primary can help protect a moderate strong incumbent from being knocked out in a closed party primary by a more extreme candidate within that party. An incumbent only needs to make top-four to advance. [30]
Any challenger to an incumbent, even within the same party, can advance if they also are able to make the top-four.

Vote splitting

With a pick-one, top-four primary, advancing top-four candidates maintains a threat of vote splitting, same as a pick-one nonpartisan blanket primary top-two primary, just a little more generous with 4 candidates remaining. There may be multiple candidates eliminated below fourth place, while some could have advanced if fewer candidates had run and split their vote.

For illustration, a party with 48% could theoretically win all top-four if their four candidates each earned 12%, while a stronger 52% majority party might equally split their votes at 10.4% each and lose all five candidates. Vote-splitting will be experienced as threatening to parties who may lose all their candidates, compared to a closed primary where one candidate from each party always advances.

Likewise, the use of sequential-elimination ranked IRV in the primary also suffers from vote-splitting. [31] [32] [33] [34] [15] [16] [17] Candidates are eliminated based only on first-choice votes, which become split between similar candidates vying for them. The transfer of votes between candidates mitigates this effect somewhat (when two candidates have identical appeal to voters and their votes wholly transfer to each other) but does not eliminate it in the general case, as advocates claim. [35] [36] To avoid vote-splitting in the RCV general election, parties must still try to discourage too many candidates running under their label, and party voters need to be informed which candidates are most likely to advance to avoid wasting their vote.

An argument in favor of a pick-one top-four primary is that people's first rank choices are most important and the eventual winner of the election will most likely be among the top-four first-rank choices. A pick-one top-four primary can be considered a single non-transferable vote (SNTV) system.

An argument in favor of using IRV sequential-elimination in the primary is that more voters help pick the top-four, and marginally more will be happy with supporting at least one in the general election.[ clarification needed ]

Variations

The uniting feature of all variations is to reduce the field of candidates in a primary round, and confirming a majority winner in the general election. Ranked ballots enables a majority winner among more than two candidates.

Final Five Voting

Final Five Voting is a variation proposed by Katherine Gehl, American businesswoman president/CEO of her family-owned company, Gehl Foods. In 2020 she created a not-for-profit Institute for Political Innovation to foster cross-partisan cooperation in election and political reform. [9] [37] Final Five Voting uses a pick-one primary, with the top-five candidates advancing to an IRV general election for a majority winner. Allowing five candidates to advance could, for example, allow two strong Democrats, two strong Republicans and one independent to advance, allowing intra-party and inter-party differences of opinion to be debated. [9] [38] [39] However, Final Five Voting still suffers from vote-splitting, which could cause it to advance candidates all from the same party, even if the majority of voters preferred a different party.

Primary

Top-four primary flowcharts
Pick-oneRanked-choice
SimpleWith floor thresholdSequential eliminationWith floor and consolidation thresholds
Top-4-primary-one-vote-flowchart.png Top-4-primary-one-vote-threshold-flowchart.png Top-4-primary-flowchart.png Top-4-primary-threshold-flowchart.png
Pick-One, Top-Four Advance
The simplest voting top-four primary uses pick-one , allowing only one choice to be expressed, and the top-four candidates advance, first proposed by FairVote in 2012 [5] for giving twice as many choices as a traditional top-two primary. The eventual winner of any runoff system will likely be in this top-four set, but in a primary of many candidates, there will be vote-splitting and like-minded voters are not allowed the chance to consolidate behind a strongest choice.
A lower threshold may be included to eliminate candidates below it. This may allow fewer than four candidates to advance and focus attention on the strongest candidates in the general election.
Use IRV Sequential-Elimination for Top-Four
Using ranked ballots and IRV in the open primary is not necessary, but it minimizes the risks of vote splitting where a party might lose all their candidates. A IRV sequential-elimination process will maximize the number of voters helping to pick the top set of candidates who advance.
With sequential-elimination, a party (or any group) with 20% of the vote, with members ranking only within their party, they will be guaranteed to advance at least one strongest candidate. [40]
Minimum Thresholds in Top-Four
Minimum thresholds may be required to pass the primary. There are two types of threshold - a lower floor threshold on the first count with first-rank support, and a higher consolidation threshold with elimination of lower candidates. Thresholds are often used in exhaustive ballot runoffs if candidates don't voluntarily withdraw. [41] In a top-four process, there is an implicit threshold of 20% above which a candidate is logically guaranteed to make the top-four.
A 5% floor threshold may be required for first choice viability, and a 10% consolidation threshold with transfer votes from a sequential-elimination. Including thresholds may result in fewer than four candidates advancing, rewarding stronger candidates with more attention.
For example, if four candidates remaining have A=48%, B=45%, C=5%, and D=2% of the vote, it can be argued it is better to also eliminate C and D, allowing voter attention to focus on the strongest two candidates.
Lower-end thresholds, like a 1% floor threshold and 5% consolidation threshold can still be useful over no thresholds as a vetting process.
Threshold passed helps vet candidates as serious and deserving of journalistic attention, debate/forum inclusion, and general election ballot access. These significant weaker candidates may be unable to win, but they can help change the quality of campaign issues that are addressed. Stronger candidates have an incentive to pick sides on the issues of weaker candidates to earn lower rank support from their voters.

Post-primary

Voluntary Drop-out Between Primary and General
If a party advances two (or more) candidates among the top-four, candidates may desire to drop out and endorse another, helping a party focus resources and earn more positive attention on that one strongest choice. To aid this process, election rules may include a final date for candidates to drop-out and be voluntarily excluded from the general election ballot. That final date would ideally be after a public debate/forum, along with feedback from public polls.
General election variation flowcharts
SequentialTop-two
IRV counting flowchart 4-choices.png IRV-toptwo flowchart.png

General

Sequential-Elimination IRV in General election
An instant-runoff voting general election eliminates one candidate at a time, allowing ballots for eliminated candidates to move to their next viable choice. This process continues until one candidate consolidates a 50%+1 of the vote. [6]
Top-two Advancement or Batch-style Elimination IRV in General election
A top-two IRV advancement may be preferable for major parties or candidates, allowing the top-two candidates to advance to compete head-to-head in a final count. A top-two IRV or batch-style IRV elimination was used in 3 states in 1912: Florida, Indiana, and Minnesota (called preferential voting, replaced by party primaries by the 1930s). [42] [43]
Top-two IRV makes no difference among three candidates, but among four, a top-two may cause vote-splitting between third and fourth place: they could both be eliminated without a chance to consolidate. This risk of vote splitting can encourage one of two like-minded candidates to drop-out, if both are polling below top-two.
Top-two IRV is consistent with majority rule among four candidates. The top-two candidates control the largest pair-combined majority of the vote. Candidates who believe they can win don't want to risk falling from second place to third and lose their chance to compete head-to-head against their strongest rival.
For example, a tough top-four election case might look like: A=40%, B=25.01%, C=24.99%, D=10%. A sequential-elimination IRV would eliminate D and allow their transfer votes to decide which of B or C advances, while the top-two IRV process would let A and B compete head-to-head for a winner. The system has no knowledge which of A, B, or C can win a final majority, so it can be argued most fair to reward the voters of B with the chance to compete head-to-head against A for having more top-choice support. This potential vote splitting can be considered to punish D voters, those who support C next, for not compromising immediately to a stronger choice. However supporters for C and D both retain a chance to help identify the majority preference between A and B via their lower ranked choices.
Condorcet Methods or Round Robin Voting in General election
Edward B. Foley, American lawyer, law professor, election law scholar, promotes a Round-robin voting [44] process (Like Round-robin tournaments) in a top-four general election. [45] This identifies a head-to-head Condorcet winner, using ranked ballots to determine all 6 permutations pairwise majority preferences among 4 candidates (A versus B, A v. C, A v. D, B v. C, B v. D, C v. D). If one candidate can beat the other 3 pairwise, they win as the strongest majority candidate.
Condorcet elections differ from runoff elections in that all lower preferences are considered, and how you vote in lower preferences can affect whether a higher choices win or lose. This fact may encourage tactics like bullet voting for a favorite or burying strongest rivals. (In contrast IRV meets a Later-no-harm criterion which promises to never let lower choices harm higher ones, because they are ignored unless all higher ones are eliminated, but which does not make it safe to rank a favorite first.)
This can cause surprising results. Theoretically a choice whom is no one's first choice can win, for being everyone's second choice. (IRV, in contrast, can eliminate a candidate even when the electorate preferred them over all others.)
It is also possible there will be no Condorcet winner, like the Rock, Paper, Scissors game where each beats one, and loses to one. These circular ties are rare, but in such cases, special rules must be decided to break the "cycle" to pick a winner.
For example, the Black method uses the Borda count instead if there is a cycle (named after Duncan Black). Better special rules ideally would attempt to minimize the benefits of insincere tactical voting.

Summary

All of these variations, including a traditional nonpartisan blanket primary, allow a majority to confirm the winner.

Variations of primary and general election within a top-four primary system
#Round one (primary)Round two (general)Implementations
Pick-one, top-two advancePick-oneTraditional nonpartisan blanket primary
1Pick-one, top-four advance Top-two IRV
2Pick-one, top-four advanceRanked IRV, sequential-elimination Alaska [10]
3Ranked-choice, sequential-elimination until at most four remainRanked IRV, sequential-elimination
4Ranked-choice, sequential-elimination until at most four remainTop-two IRV
5(Any top-four process) Round-robin voting

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Two-round system</span> Voting system

The two-round system (TRS), also known as runoff voting, second ballot, or ballotage, is a voting method used to elect a single candidate, where voters cast a single vote for their preferred candidate. It generally ensures a majoritarian result, not a simple-plurality result as under first past the post. Under the two-round election system, the election process usually proceeds to a second round only if in the first round no candidate received an absolute majority of votes cast, or some other lower prescribed percentage. Under the two-round system, usually only the two candidates who received the most votes in the first round, or only those candidates who received above a prescribed proportion of the votes, are candidates in the second round. Other candidates are excluded from the second round.

In social choice theory and politics, the spoiler effect refers to a situation where the entry of a losing (that is, irrelevant) candidate affects the results of an election. A voting system that is not affected by spoilers satisfies independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA) or independence of spoilers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Condorcet method</span> Pairwise-comparison electoral system

A Condorcet method is an election method that elects the candidate who wins a majority of the vote in every head-to-head election against each of the other candidates, whenever there is such a candidate. A candidate with this property, the pairwise champion or beats-all winner, is formally called the Condorcet winner. The head-to-head elections need not be done separately; a voter's choice within any given pair can be determined from the ranking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monotonicity criterion</span> Property of electoral systems

The monotonicity criterion, also called positive response, is a principle of social choice theory that says voters should never have a negative effect on an election's results. In other words, increasing a winning candidate's grade should not cause them to lose.

The Borda count electoral system can be combined with an instant-runoff procedure to create hybrid election methods that are called Nanson method and Baldwin method. Both methods are designed to satisfy the Condorcet criterion, and allow for incomplete ballots and equal rankings.

A nonpartisan blanket primary is a primary election in which all candidates for the same elected office run against each other at once, regardless of the political party. Partisan elections are, on the other hand, segregated by political party. Nonpartisan blanket primaries are slightly different from most other elections systems with two rounds/a runoff, also known as "jungle primaries" , in a few ways. The first round of a nonpartisan blanket primary is officially the "primary." Round two is the "general election." Round two must be held, even if one candidate receives a majority in the first round.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a voting method used in single-seat elections with more than two candidates. Instead of voting only for a single candidate, voters in IRV elections can rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice, losing candidates are eliminated, and ballots for losing candidates are redistributed until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an "instant runoff" that allows a comparison of the top two candidates head-to-head.

Electoral reform in Alaska refers to efforts to change the voting laws in this U.S. state. U.S. Senator John McCain and other Republicans endorsed a referendum to implement Instant Runoff Voting, after the conservative vote split between the Republican candidate and the Alaskan Independence Party candidate, allowing a Democrat to win the governorship. However, the League of Women Voters opposed it, citing the principle of one man, one vote, and the measure was defeated. Another issue is whether Alaska will join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact and designate its three electors to the candidate winning the nationwide popular vote, rather than the winner of the state's vote. SB 138, a bill to do just that, was introduced in 2007, but was not approved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ranked-choice voting in the United States</span> Electoral system used in some cities and states

Ranked-choice voting (RCV) can refer to one of several ranked voting methods used in some cities and states in the United States. The term is not strictly defined, but most often refers to instant-runoff voting (IRV) or single transferable vote (STV).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mary Peltola</span> American politician (born 1973)

Mary Sattler Peltola is an American politician and former tribal judge serving as the U.S. representative from Alaska's at-large congressional district since September 2022. A member of the Democratic Party, she previously served as a judge on the Orutsararmiut Native Council's tribal court, executive director of the Kuskokwim River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Bethel city councilor and member of the Alaska House of Representatives.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV), also known as plurality with elimination or plurality loser, is a ranked-choice voting system that modifies plurality by repeatedly eliminating the last-place winner until only one candidate is left. In the United Kingdom, it is generally called the alternative vote (AV). In the United States, IRV is often referred to as ranked-choice voting (RCV), by way of conflation with ranked voting systems in general.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2009 Burlington mayoral election</span> Election in Vermont

The 2009 Burlington mayoral election was held in March 2009 for the city of Burlington, Vermont. This was the second mayoral election since the city's 2005 change to instant-runoff voting (IRV), after the 2006 mayoral election. In the 2009 election, incumbent Burlington mayor won reelection as a member of the Vermont Progressive Party, defeating Kurt Wright in the final round with 48% of the vote. The election created a controversy over several election pathologies, after Kiss was declared winner as a result of 750 votes cast against his candidacy, over the objections of the 54% of Burlington voters who had preferred Andy Montroll.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral system</span> Method by which voters make a choice between options

An electoral system or voting system is a set of rules that determine how elections and referendums are conducted and how their results are determined. Electoral systems are used in politics to elect governments, while non-political elections may take place in business, non-profit organisations and informal organisations. These rules govern all aspects of the voting process: when elections occur, who is allowed to vote, who can stand as a candidate, how ballots are marked and cast, how the ballots are counted, how votes translate into the election outcome, limits on campaign spending, and other factors that can affect the result. Political electoral systems are defined by constitutions and electoral laws, are typically conducted by election commissions, and can use multiple types of elections for different offices.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ranked voting</span> Family of electoral systems

The term ranked voting, also known as preferential voting or ranked-choice voting, pertains to any voting system where voters indicate a rank to order candidates or options—in a sequence from first, second, third, and onwards—on their ballots. Ranked voting systems vary based on the ballot marking process, how preferences are tabulated and counted, the number of seats available for election, and whether voters are allowed to rank candidates equally.

A unified primary is an electoral system for narrowing the field of candidates for a single-winner election, similar to a nonpartisan blanket primary, but using approval voting for the first round, advancing the top-two candidates, allowing voters to confirm the majority-supported candidate in the general election.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Alaska gubernatorial election</span> Election for the governorship of the U.S. state of Alaska

The 2022 Alaska gubernatorial election was held on Tuesday November 8, 2022, to elect the governor of Alaska. Incumbent Republican Governor Mike Dunleavy won re-election to a second term, becoming the first Republican governor to be re-elected to a second term since Jay Hammond in 1978 and the first governor, regardless of political affiliation, to be re-elected to a second term since Tony Knowles in 1998.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 United States House of Representatives election in Alaska</span> U.S. House election in Alaska

The November 2022 United States House of Representatives election in Alaska was held on Tuesday, November 8, to elect a member of the United States House of Representatives to represent the state of Alaska. Democratic incumbent Mary Peltola won reelection to a full term in office, defeating Republicans Sarah Palin and Nick Begich III and Libertarian Chris Bye in the runoff count.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Alaska Senate election</span> U.S. state election

The 2022 Alaska Senate elections took place on November 8, 2022, with the primary elections being held on August 16, 2022. State senators serve four-year terms in the Alaska Senate, with half of the seats normally up for election every two years. However, because most districts were greatly changed in redistricting, elections were held for 19 of the 20 seats; the only exception is District T, represented by Democrat Donny Olson, which was mostly unchanged in redistricting and thus did not have an election. Some senators were elected to serve four-year terms, while others would serve shortened two-year terms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election</span>

The 2022 Alaska at-large congressional district special election was held on August 16 to fill the seat left vacant after the death of Republican incumbent Don Young. Mary Peltola defeated former governor Sarah Palin in the election, becoming the first Democrat to represent Alaska in the House since 1972, the first Alaska Native elected to Congress, and the first woman elected to represent Alaska in the House.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Alaska elections</span>

The 2022 Alaska state elections took place on November 8, 2022. The state also held Regional Educational Attendance Area (REAA) elections on the first Tuesday in October.

References

  1. 1 2 "Alaska Voters Approve Landmark Nonpartisan Election Reforms". 18 November 2020.
  2. 1 2 "Missouri Top-Four Ranked Choice Voting Elections for Local, State, and Federal Officials Initiative (2022)".
  3. ↑ "Top-four primary (ballotpedia.org)".
  4. ↑ "OPINION: Voters in Florida and Alaska both did the right thing on open-primary initiatives". December 2020.
  5. 1 2 Fixing Top Two in California The 2012 Elections and a Prescription for Further Reform
  6. 1 2 Top Four FairVote August 2013
  7. ↑ "FAIRVOTE'S 2015 POLICY GUIDE: MODEL STATUTORY LANGUAGE".
  8. ↑ Top Four Why Top Four Gives More Voice to Voters (FairVote)
  9. 1 2 3 "Final-Five Voting".
  10. 1 2 "Alaska Ballot Measure 2, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting and Campaign Finance Laws Initiative (2020)".
  11. ↑ "Alaska Division of Elections".
  12. ↑ "Alaska U.S. House candidates use industry forum to try to stand out in crowded field". 13 May 2022.
  13. ↑ "Independent al Gross says he's ending Alaska House bid".
  14. ↑ "Alaska judge sides with elections office in decision keeping Tara Sweeney off U.S. House special election ballot".
  15. 1 2 Samuels, Iris (October 11, 2022). "Republican U.S. House candidates in Alaska continue to attack each other while urging voters to 'rank the red'". Anchorage Daily News. Retrieved 2022-10-15. Begich and Palin … split the Republican share of the vote in an August special election, allowing Peltola to come away with the victory
  16. 1 2 Derysh, Igor (2022-09-01). ""Scam to rig elections": Tom Cotton fumes over Sarah Palin loss as GOP fans cry "stolen election"". Salon. Retrieved 2022-10-15. Peltola would have still won under traditional rules because she finished first while the two Republicans split the GOP vote share.
  17. 1 2 "Trump-backed Sarah Palin loses special election for Alaska congressional seat". World Socialist Web Site. 2 September 2022. Retrieved 2022-10-15. the Republican vote was split nearly equally between Palin and Nick Begich
  18. ↑ Graham-Squire, Adam; McCune, David (2022-09-18). "A Mathematical Analysis of the 2022 Alaska Special Election for US House". arXiv: 2209.04764 [econ.GN]. Begich wins both of his head-to-head matchups against the other two candidates
  19. ↑ "Did the 2022 Alaska congressional special election have a Condorcet winner?". Politics Stack Exchange. Retrieved 2022-10-15.
  20. ↑ "It's official: Sarah Palin cost the GOP a House seat". Washington Post. ISSN   0190-8286 . Retrieved 2022-10-15. the other Republican in the race, Nick Begich, would have defeated Rep.-elect Mary Peltola (D) if the race had boiled down to the two of them.
  21. ↑ Montalbano, Sarah. "Alaska's Ranked-Choice Voting Was a Fiasco. Nevada Should Take Note". The American Spectator. Retrieved 2022-10-15. Palin and Begich split the Republican first-choice votes with 31.3 percent and 28.5 percent respectively … The FairVote analysis reveals that in any scenario except the one that played out, Begich would have won.
  22. ↑ "Campaigns for ranked-choice voting ballot initiatives in Missouri, Nevada have raised millions ahead of signature deadlines – Ballotpedia News". 20 April 2022.
  23. ↑ "Signatures submitted for ranked-choice voting initiative in Missouri – Ballotpedia News". 10 May 2022.
  24. ↑ Keller, Rudi (2022-07-18). "Fate of Missouri marijuana initiative petition unclear as signature count continues". Missouri Independent. Retrieved 2023-01-31. Better Elections did not have sufficient signatures in the 1st District, where tabulation is complete.
  25. ↑ Ashcroft, John R. "Constitutional Amendment to Article VIII, Relating to Elections for State and Federal Officials, version 1 2022-051" (PDF).
  26. ↑ Keller, Rudi (2022-06-16). "Ranked-choice voting proposal may miss Missouri ballot, campaign says". Missouri Independent. Retrieved 2023-01-31.
  27. ↑ "Supreme Court: Ranked-choice voting can go to ballot, but not tax petitions, vouchers". 28 June 2022.
  28. ↑ "Nevada Top-Five Ranked Choice Voting Initiative (2022)".
  29. ↑ "2020's Elections Show Cities and States Leading on Democracy Reform". 4 November 2020.
  30. ↑ "Will Ranked-Choice Voting Help or Hurt Lisa Murkowski?". 30 June 2021.
  31. ↑ Maskin, Eric (2022-06-17). "How to Improve Ranked-Choice Voting and Democracy". Capitalism and Society. Rochester, NY: 3. SSRN   4138767.
  32. ↑ Poundstone, William (2013). Gaming the vote : why elections aren't fair (and what we can do about it). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 180. ISBN   978-1-4299-5764-9. OCLC   872601019. IRV is subject to something called the "center squeeze." A popular moderate can receive relatively few first-place votes through no fault of her own but because of vote splitting from candidates to the right and left.
  33. ↑ "Rebutting false and misleading testimony from RCV advocates". Oregon State Legislature. 2022. RCV does not eliminate spoilers or vote-splitting, and studies show that they can occur in 1 in 5 competitive elections
  34. ↑ Hamlin, Aaron (2019-02-07). "The Limits of Ranked-Choice Voting". The Center for Election Science. Retrieved 2022-10-15. On the surface, with all the ranking transfers that RCV does, it looks like RCV addresses the vote splitting issue. But it only does so a little bit.
  35. ↑ McGuire, Brendan (2020-12-31). "The Top-Four Primary and Alaska Ballot Measure 2". Alaska Law Review. 37 (2): 311. ISSN   0883-0568. There are four core arguments in favor of top-four primary systems: … (d) avoid "vote splitting."
  36. ↑ Brittingham, Audrey (2021-06-10). "Ranked Choice Voting: How Voters Have Responded to a Failing Political System". Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality. 9 (2): 262. It eliminates "vote splitting" or the idea of "throwing your vote away" in order to vote your conscience.
  37. ↑ "What is final five voting? A Q&A with Katherine Gehl". September 2021.
  38. ↑ "Opinion: It's time to get rid of party primaries". CNN . 12 March 2021.
  39. ↑ "'Final Five' bill would drastically alter how Wisconsin sends people to Congress". 14 December 2021.
  40. ↑ Top Four Primary Ranked Choice Voting for U.S. House Elections
  41. ↑ DFL Call 2008/2009 Archived 2008-02-21 at the Wayback Machine Page 27: VIII. Endorsement for U.S. Senate: 22. General Endorsement Rules: Dropoff rule: Candidates receiving less than 5% will be dropped after the first ballot. On subsequent ballots, the dropoff threshold will be raised by 5% each ballot to a maximum of 25%. After the fifth ballot and each subsequent ballot, the lowest remaining candidates will be dropped so that no more than two candidates remain. In the event that application of the dropoff rule would eliminate all but one candidate, then the two candidates who received the highest percent of the vote on the prior ballot shall be the remaining candidates.
  42. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20120211230909/http://archive.fairvote.org/irv/vt_lite/history.htm In the United States, IRV election laws were first adopted in 1912. Four states -- Florida, Indiana, Maryland, and Minnesota -- used versions of IRV for party primaries. Of the four states with IRV, only the Maryland law used the standard IRV sequential elimination of bottom candidates, while the others used batch elimination of all but the top two candidates.
  43. ↑ Hoag, Clarence Gilbert (1914). Effective Voting: An Article on Preferential Voting and Proportional Representation. U.S. Government Printing Office.
  44. ↑ The Constitution and Condorcet: Democracy Protection through Electoral Reform Edward B. Foley, Drake Law Review, Forthcoming, June 3, 2022 (pp. 10-11, Round-Robin Voting)
  45. ↑ Foley, Edward B. (3 June 2022). "The Constitution and Condorcet: Democracy Protection through Electoral Reform". doi:10.2139/ssrn.4127560. SSRN   4127560.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.