Bipartisan legislation to allow our political parties to use Ranked Choice Voting in Connecticut’s presidential primaries was proposed by a pair of reform-minded lawmakers — a Democrat and a Republican — during the recent session of the Connecticut General Assembly, but it did not move out of its legislative committee of cognizance.
Their bill had the support of Gov. Ned Lamont, and while it is encouraging that a bill was proposed, the fact that it did not advance represents a missed opportunity for Connecticut to provide leadership on an important election reform.
Adopting the RCV bill would have helped to address our increasingly toxic national politics and provided an opportunity for Connecticut to lead by example on RCV, as other states have done.
In 2020, the state Democratic parties in Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, Nevada, and Wyoming used RCV in their presidential primaries without incident or controversy and in the states and jurisdictions where RCV has been implemented, the response from voters and political parties overwhelmingly has been positive.
The Republican Party in Virginia used RCV in its 2021 primaries, which produced a slate of candidates with such broad support that it swept the 2021 elections. Even former Republican Gov. George Allen touted the GOP’s successful use of ranked-choice voting, saying RCV “brought unity” and that “there was respect for the process.”
Virginia Republicans now say on their website that RCV in 2021 demonstrated that “the Virginia Republican Party is committed to holding a fair, easy, and secure election process that allows the maximum number of voters to engage.”
Numerous studies have demonstrated that RCV helps produce consensus candidates and forces candidates to appeal across partisan divides because they must seek second- and third-place rankings in order to win.
As the 2024 election cycle begins, we are again seeing a situation where the greater the number of challengers to the candidacy of former President Donald Trump, the greater the likelihood that Trump will be the nominee because the vote for alternative candidates will be splintered, and the former president can “win” without having the support of a majority.
RCV would also help ensure that all Connecticut communities can better engage their voters, which has been a top legislative priority in our state as evidenced by the recent passage of Early Voting and the CT Voting Rights Act. RCV would build on those victories for voters in all communities by producing representatives with the broadest appeal and the best solutions.
In RCV elections, community leaders and innovators have ballot access and genuine opportunities to run viable and competitive campaigns for election, representing the very foundation of our democracy that depends on having choice on the ballot and candidates with the best ideas. Expanded choice provides freedom to voters to choose the candidates best able to respond to the needs of their communities, and the freedom for candidates to enter political races with a real chance to compete.
Like the experience in Virginia, RCV in New York City’s 2021 municipal primary helped elect the most diverse and gender-balanced NYC government in history, precisely because more choices were available to voters.
RCV is a voting system that increases competition and choice, empowers voters and encourages greater civic engagement, including running for elective office. Opponents have claimed that RCV is difficult. But in 2022, 85 percent of Alaska voters found RCV “simple.”
In NYC’s 2021 primary, 95 percent of voters said the RCV ballot was “simple to complete” and in Maine’s 2018 primary, 90 percent of voters said their experience with RCV was “excellent” or “good.”
Data across the country also shows that voters are perfectly capable of ranking their candidates and that the vast majority of voters voting in a ranked-choice voting election — even for the first time — said they understood how it worked.
The real question to ask about RCV is what kind of democracy we want to leave to the next generation of voters. If used in presidential and other primaries, RCV will engage a broader pipeline of candidates to serve Connecticut’s communities and will empower voters by providing more choices. And proponents of RCV ask: in what area of our lives, our jobs or our political environment is having more choices not a good thing?
RCV produces consensus candidates by forcing candidates to appeal across partisan lines, which would transform the current political system from one that rewards elected officials who appeal to the extremes — particularly in primaries — to one that produces decisions that more closely reflect the will of the majority of voters.
These are significant ways to strengthen Connecticut’s system of democracy. The question for the General Assembly should not be if we implement RVC, but instead how we implement RCV as soon as possible so we all reap the benefits of this powerful and potentially healing electoral reform.
Monte Frank was a candidate for lieutenant governor in 2018, served as president of the Connecticut Bar Association in 2016 and was the chair of the Griebel-Frank for CT party. He currently serves on the Board of Advisors of CTVotersFirst.
