Ranked Choice Voting
What if voters could rank candidates instead of choosing only one?
Ranked choice voting is one proposed reform designed to reduce spoiler effects,
encourage broader appeal, and give voters more flexibility at the ballot box.
Ranked choice voting changes how voters mark ballots and how winners are counted.
In most American elections, voters choose one candidate. The candidate with the most votes wins, even if that candidate receives less than a majority of all votes cast.
Ranked choice voting works differently. Voters rank candidates in order of preference: first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on.
How Traditional Voting Usually Works
Most U.S. elections use a system sometimes called plurality voting.
Choose One
Voters select one candidate from the ballot.
Most Votes Wins
The candidate with the most votes wins, even without a majority.
Spoiler Risk
Similar candidates can split voters and affect the final result.
In a crowded race, a candidate can win with only 35% or 40% of the vote if the rest of the vote is divided among several opponents.
How Ranked Choice Voting Works
In ranked choice voting, voters rank candidates in order of preference.
Sample Ranked Ballot
Voters do not have to rank every candidate unless local rules require it. In many systems, voters may rank as many or as few candidates as they want.
How the Counting Works
Ranked choice voting usually works through a series of counting rounds.
First Choices Are Counted
Election officials count every voter’s first-choice candidate.
Majority Check
If one candidate receives more than 50%, that candidate wins.
Lowest Candidate Drops
If no one has a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated.
Votes Transfer
Ballots for the eliminated candidate move to each voter’s next ranked choice.
This process continues until one candidate has a majority of the active ballots.
A Simple Example
Imagine an election with four candidates. After the first round, no candidate has a majority.
Round 1
Candidate D has the fewest votes and is eliminated. Voters who ranked Candidate D first have their ballots moved to their next choice.
Final Round Example
In this simplified example, Candidate B wins after later-choice votes are counted.
What Problem Is Ranked Choice Voting Trying to Solve?
Ranked choice voting is usually proposed as a response to several problems in winner-take-all elections.
One concern is the spoiler effect. When two candidates appeal to similar voters, they can split the vote and allow a less broadly supported candidate to win.
Another concern is negative campaigning. If candidates need to become voters’ second or third choice, they may have more incentive to appeal beyond their most loyal base.
In theory, candidates may need to speak to a wider range of voters, avoid alienating potential second-choice supporters, and build broader coalitions.
How Would It Change the Voter Experience?
For voters, ranked choice voting could make elections feel less like an all-or-nothing choice.
A voter could rank a favorite candidate first, while still ranking a more broadly viable candidate second. That means voters may feel freer to support candidates they genuinely prefer without worrying as much about helping elect their least preferred option.
Vote Sincerely
Voters can rank their true favorite first without giving up backup choices.
Backup Choices
If a first-choice candidate is eliminated, the ballot can still count later.
Broader Appeal
Candidates may seek second-choice support from voters outside their base.
How Would It Change Campaigns?
Ranked choice voting could change campaign strategy.
In a traditional election, candidates often focus on energizing their base and attacking their closest opponents.
In a ranked system, candidates may also need to ask:
- Can I become a second choice for voters who prefer someone else?
- Can I appeal to voters outside my strongest base?
- Will attacking another candidate alienate that candidate’s supporters?
- Can I build a coalition broad enough to survive later counting rounds?
This does not guarantee positive campaigns, but it may change the incentives.
What Tradeoffs Would It Create?
Ranked choice voting is not a magic fix. It solves some problems while creating new questions.
The ballot is more expressive, but also more complex. Voters must understand how ranking works, how many candidates they may rank, and what happens if they leave rankings blank.
Counting can also take longer, especially in close races where multiple rounds are needed.
Another concern is voter exhaustion. If a voter ranks only candidates who are eliminated, that ballot may no longer count in the final round.
Supporters often argue voter education can reduce confusion. Critics often argue election systems should remain as simple and transparent as possible.
Would Ranked Choice Voting Change Congress?
Ranked choice voting would not transform Congress as dramatically as proportional representation.
If each district still elects only one representative, the basic structure remains the same: one district, one winner, one member of Congress.
But it could change who wins primaries and general elections, especially in crowded fields.
Candidates with intense support from a narrow faction might still do well, but candidates with broader second-choice appeal could gain an advantage.
That distinction matters. Ranked choice voting may reduce spoiler effects and encourage broader appeal, but it does not necessarily make seat totals proportional to vote totals.
What Would It Take to Make It Happen?
Ranked choice voting can usually be adopted through state or local law, depending on the office and jurisdiction.
For federal congressional elections, states generally have significant authority over election administration, though Congress also has constitutional power to regulate federal elections.
Adoption would usually require:
- State legislation, local ordinance, or voter-approved ballot measure
- Updated ballot design
- Voting equipment capable of tabulating ranked ballots
- Clear counting rules
- Public voter education
- Procedures for audits, recounts, and transparency
A constitutional amendment would usually not be required for many forms of ranked choice voting, but legal rules vary depending on the office, state constitution, and election law.
Where Is Ranked Choice Voting Used?
Ranked choice voting is not just a theory. It is already used in parts of the United States, though adoption is uneven and politically contested.
At the statewide level, Maine and Alaska use ranked choice voting in major elections. Maine uses it for federal elections and certain primaries, while Alaska uses it as part of a broader election system that combines open primaries with ranked choice general elections.
Ranked choice voting is also used, or has been approved for use, in a number of cities, counties, and local governments across the country. Examples include places such as New York City, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Portland, Maine, and Portland, Oregon.
The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that ranked choice voting is used statewide in Alaska and Maine, used in various municipalities, prohibited in 19 states, explicitly permitted or required in 8 states, and legally unclear in many others. FairVote reports that, as of March 2026, 49 U.S. jurisdictions use ranked choice voting in public elections or have approved it for future use.
What Do Voters Think of It?
There is no single national consensus. Voter reaction has been mixed and often depends on local experience, political trust, ballot design, and how well the system is explained.
In some places, voters have approved ranked choice voting by large margins. New York City voters approved it in 2019, and the system has since been used in city elections.
In other places, voters have rejected ranked choice voting or voted to ban it. Several statewide ballot measures failed in 2024, while Alaska voters narrowly kept their ranked choice/open primary system in place.
Support often rises when voters see ranked choice voting as giving them more choice and reducing spoiler effects. Opposition often rises when voters see it as confusing, slow to count, or less transparent than traditional elections.
That means implementation matters. Clear ballot design, voter education, transparent counting rules, and public trust in election administration are critical to whether voters accept the system.
Why This Debate Matters
Ranked choice voting asks a different question than many election reforms.
It asks whether voters should be forced to choose only one candidate, or whether ballots should allow voters to express a fuller range of preferences.
The answer depends on what people value most:
- Simple ballots?
- Majority winners?
- More voter choice?
- Reduced spoiler effects?
- Faster election-night results?
- Campaigns that reward broader appeal?
Ranked choice voting would not remove politics from elections — but it could change how voters express preferences and how candidates compete for support.