Ranked-choice voting (RCV)
ballotpedia.org
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

RCV trends: Four states ban RCV in 2025, bringing the number of states with bans to 15.

(Okay idk why it says 15 up here then later says 16, somebody on that site probably didn’t update the title text)

As of April 30, five states had banned RCV in 2025, which brought the total number of states that prohibit RCV to 16.

  • Gov. Mark Gordon (Republican) signed HB 165 on March 18.
  • West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (Republican) signed SB 490 the March 19.
  • Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (Democrat) signed SB 6 into law on April 1.
  • North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong (Republican) signed HB 1297 on April 15.
  • Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Republican) signed HB 1706 which became law on April 17.

Six states banned RCV in 2024.

Why YSK: If you’re a US-American, its time to pay attention to State and Local politics instead of solely on the Federal. There is a trend in conservative jurisdictions to stop progress in making elecoral systems more fair. Use this opportunity as a rallying-cry to pass Ranked-Choice Voting in progressive jurisdictions, and hopefully everyone else takes notes. Sometimes, all you need is a few states adopting a law to become the catalyst for it to become the model for the entire country, for better or for worse. Don’t allow anti-RCV legislations to dominate, counter the propaganda with pro-RCV arguments. Time to turn the tide.

Edit: fixed formatting

Edit 2: Added in the map so you don’t have to click the link:

See the pattern? 🤔

  • GuyFawkes@midwest.socialEnglish
    14·
    17 days ago

    Can anyone explain to me why a BAN was even needed? If a State is FPTP that’s the way it is; why do they need to say a different way is not allowed? Especially because of that different way were to actually be viable enough to become law it would just be a one two step - repeal the old, then institute the new.

      • howrar@lemmy.ca
        15·
        17 days ago

        Changing the voting system involves changing the law, doesn’t it? Can’t you just revert the ban in that very same bill?

        Edit: Ah, I just saw in another comment that this affects lower levels of government that wouldn’t have the power to make this change.

    • throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.worksOPEnglish
      13·
      17 days ago

      They don’t want sub-divisions of the State (cities/towns) to implement RCV in their local elections. Probably to avoid the idea to spread. It like Democracy/Republicanism. When the French got rid of their monarchy, all the monarchs of nearby countries were afraid the sentinment would spread, same thing here.

      Edit: spelling

    • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      9·
      17 days ago

      The link gives some arguments. It’s mostly stupid right wing claptrap.

      Opponents of ranked-choice voting argue that it benefits voters with more time and information, leads to decreased voter confidence in elections, and disconnects voting from important issues and debates. Opponents of ranked-choice voting also argue that RCV winners do not necessarily represent the will of the voters.

      It goes on to giving statements for those reasons from such respectable organizations as The Heritage Foundation, so do what you want with that.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      6·
      17 days ago

      The Ohio HoR just overwhelming voted to remove all state funding from any city that implements ranked choice voting. It threatens the parties in power, so they are both eager to stomp it out

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
        5·
        17 days ago

        Nope, the “No” campaign (keeping ranked choice voting) outspent the campaign to repeal ranked choice voting by 100:1, largely with out of state money.

        Former Lt. Gov. Loren Leman, an advocate for repeal, said he hopes the Legislature will pass a law getting rid of the voting system, but if that doesn’t happen, another repeal initiative is possible.

        “I would say half of Alaskan voters were influenced, at least in part, and maybe in large part, by big money from outside the state,” he said by phone. “And ours was a grassroots, homebody campaign.”

        The No on 2 campaign attracted nearly $14 millionin contributions, largely from outside the state, and outspent the Yes on 2 campaign by a 100-to-one margin.