Could ranked choice voting make elections more equitable? Washington may find out

Advocates say it empowers voters and results in more equitable representation. Critics say it’s confusing and costly to implement.

Ranked choice voting, in which voters rank candidates by preference, has gained momentum. Supporters include household names such as Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry.

More than 15 cities currently use the method, according to the election reform advocacy organization FairVote, and so does the state of Maine. New York City will use it for primary and special elections for local offices. Alaska voters last year approved a ballot measure to adopt the system, while Massachusetts voters rejected a ballot initiative.

Washington state lawmakers are considering a bill that would allow cities, counties, port districts and other local jurisdictions to start using ranked choice voting, or RCV, as soon as 2024.

House Bill 1156 has passed out of the House State Government & Tribal Relations and Appropriations committees, with four Republicans joining the committees’ Democrats in approving it.

If it becomes law, this wouldn’t be Washington’s first go at ranked choice voting. Pierce County danced with the system a little over a decade ago, and the memory is fresh in some critics’ minds.

How ranked choice voting works

There’s typically no primary election in RCV, which is sometimes called “instant-runoff” voting. All candidates advance to the general election, then voters rank them in order of preference.

For races with one winner, a candidate has to get more than 50 percent of votes to win. If no candidate gets more than 50 percent of voters’ first-choice votes, that triggers a process of elimination.

The candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated, and the second-choice votes on those ballots are counted instead. Put another way: If your first choice can’t win, your vote goes to your next-highest choice who’s still in the race, and so on.

That process is repeated until a candidate tops 50 percent.

The bill Washington lawmakers are considering this session would allow jurisdictions that opt for RCV to hold a top-five primary if a race has more than five candidates.

The system wouldn’t have to be used for every office up for election, according to committee staff, and jurisdictions could choose whether to have voters cast ballots for multi-member bodies — say, a City Council — in one combined race or separate races for each office.

The bill sets requirements for logistics, such as ballot design and vote tabulation, and creates a work group that would help the Secretary of State adopt rules for RCV elections. And it includes the possibility for grants to local governments to put the new system in place.

Advocates: Less divisive races, more equitable representation

Ranked choice voting advocates say the system gives each voter a louder voice: Even if they didn’t vote for the person who ultimately won, they didn’t throw away their vote.

Rep. Kirsten Harris-Talley (D-Seattle), the bill’s prime sponsor, said she recently participated in a mock ranked-choice vote on desserts via video conference. Her top choice, donuts, ranked dead-last in the first round, but her third choice ended up coming out on top.

“I still got a dessert I really like, even though I didn’t get my favorite dessert,” she said. That’s the mentality she says all should bring to this.

“Quite frankly, I want folks to have an affirmative experience when they vote and see a choice they cared about rise to the top,” Harris-Talley said. “Ranked choice voting lets that happen more than not.”

Nixing primaries, which typically attract fewer voters than general elections, could mean a more representative public weighs in on the full slate. And more candidates could appeal to a particular community without splitting votes.

Harris-Talley and others argue that it translates to friendlier races. If a candidate can’t have your first-place vote, they want your second.

Proponents also say it would result in a government that’s more representative of the community it serves. Harris-Talley pointed out examples of under-representation in the state: She serves with Rep. Debra Lekanoff of Bow, who is Tlingit and Aleut.

“We are still a state that’s doing first-and-onlies,” she said in a video interview. “... This is how we know the structure of voting is limiting representation. And that’s why these tools make a difference.”

She sees RCV as a tool that builds on the Washington Voting Rights Act, which the Legislature passed in 2018, opening the possibility for people to take jurisdictions to court to push them to abandon at-large elections for district representation where large minority groups are present.

One example of that is playing out in Yakima County, where four plaintiffs have alleged the county violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the votes of Latino voters and requested RCV as a remedy.

Kamau Chege heads the Washington Community Alliance, which oversees a project called Washington for Equitable Representation, a coalition of about 25 organizations that back the bill.

“It’s only by avoiding the will of the people ... that white supremacy has been able to inscribe itself into our institutions,” said Chege in a phone interview with McClatchy.

There are often “shadow primaries” in communities of color, Chege said, with the belief only one candidate can run from a given community or risk splitting the vote. Kelsey Monaco, a recent graduate of Saint Martin’s University in Lacey who has been coordinating much of Washington for Equitable Representation’s work, said ranked choice voting could allow more candidates of color to win.

Rather than strategizing to pick the “lesser of two evils,” a person can vote their conscience. “The whole idea of fair representation is the core of ranked choice voting,” she said.

White people may not think about themselves as a voting constituency and may be fine with the current system, Chege said. But the same cannot be said for communities of color.

“The Legislature this year has a choice to make about whether it will allow the racist ban on ranked choice voting to continue, or whether they’ll listen to the communities of color that testified in support of this bill and give localities the tools to create electoral systems made with communities of color in mind,” he said.

Olympia’s City Council recently used the method to select a new member to fill the seat vacated by Jessica Bateman, who was elected to the state House of Representatives. The six council members voted for their top three choices.

Council member Lisa Parshley said she brought forward the idea and found it increased transparency. The City Council passed a resolution to support RCV in October of last year.

A task force in Vancouver, Washington, is considering the system as a strategy to diversify its government. In 1997, voters there passed a ballot measure to allow for “instant-runoff” voting, according to The Columbian. It didn’t come to fruition at the time due to legal challenges.

Parshley testified in support of the bill. According to FairVote Washington, the cities of Bellingham, Gold Bar, Spokane, Burien, and Seattle also have expressed support of ranked choice voting or the bill, along with the Clallam County Charter Review Commission. The Washington State Office of the Attorney General also supports the bill.

Critics: Confusing, costly, complicated

Overhauling the way a voter casts a ballot could confuse them and undermine their confidence in elections, which is more important than ever, officials in Secretary of State Kim Wyman’s office say. The office also predicts implementation would be complicated and costly.

A partial fiscal note attached to this year’s bill projects the Washington Secretary of State’s office would spend $679,000 in 2021-23, then $622,000 in future biennia.

Predicted costs are related to changing how the state imports vote counts from counties, updating how it reports results, changing how winners are calculated in its system, and voter education. It also predicts hiring two specialists along with a part-time employee who would train stakeholders.

It upped its estimate for costs related to education for the current bill when compared to prior bills because of the 2020 general election.

“We determined more funding is needed because we learned through experience that voter education and countering disinformation and misinformation is both more costly and time consuming than it has been in the past,” the note reads.

Lori Augino, director of elections at the Secretary of State’s office, said the office doesn’t disagree with equity-related goals, but a concern about possible confusion remains. It would require asking questions about whether the change might deter or disenfranchise voters, she said.

Sam Reed, who served as Secretary of State for 12 years, voiced criticism in a 2009 News Tribune article. In a recent phone interview, he said he’s still “very cautious about it,” in part out of fear of unnerving voters.

It can be challenging for a voter to get enough information about one person to vote for them in a local election, he said. Maybe political insiders will be able to rank multiple candidates, but it presents an obstacle to the goals of ranked choice voting. He believes the primary system works to sort candidates to a manageable two-candidate general election.

If primary turnout is the concern, he said, work on that rather than cooking up a new system.

But Reed said if the idea behind the bill is for local jurisdictions to have the ability to try it out and see if it works for them, fine — he believes in local control. If it were more expansive than that, he wouldn’t support it.

Pierce County’s failed foray into RCV

A little over a decade ago, Pierce County tried RCV. Voters repealed the method a few years after approving it.

It happened at a unique moment in the history of Washington’s primaries.

According to a timeline provided online by the Secretary of State’s office: After the better part of a century with a “blanket primary” system, which let voters cast ballots for candidates of any party except in presidential primaries, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled California’s blanket primary system unconstitutional. Political parties then challenged the constitutionality of Washington’s system and ultimately won.

A “pick-a-party primary” went forward in September 2004, requiring voters to choose one of the major parties and vote only within that party. Voters approved an initiative proposing a “top two” primary system, in which they could cast their votes for any candidate and candidates from the same party could advance.

That’s the system Washington has now. But that initiative also was challenged in 2005 and made its way through the courts. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the initiative’s constitutionality in 2008.

While that system was in limbo and the pick-a-party system was in place, Pierce County reacted by approving RCV for most county office elections.

A majority of voters approved the change to the county charter in 2006. It was in place for two elections, one in 2008 and the other in 2009. In the second, a majority of Pierce County voters also repealed the change.

State Director of Elections Augino was elections manager in Pierce County in 2008.

Looking back, she said 2008 was among the toughest elections to administer. Her office mounted an aggressive outreach campaign to make sure voters understood how to mark ballots and how votes were tabulated, she said, and it required getting a system provisionally certified.

Her team was proud of the work it did to conduct that “herculean” 2008 election. At the time, then-Pierce County Auditor Pat McCarthy, who is now State Auditor, penned a 2008 op-ed in The News Tribune calling the system too time-consuming and expensive.

The first of the RCV elections made McCarthy the first woman elected Pierce County Executive.

Critics, including McCarthy, said RCV was too complex, citing an unscientific survey conducted by her office that found 57,000 voters didn’t like it. In her op-ed, she wrote that the county had spent $1.7 million in one-time costs on the system.

Some skeptics specifically pointed to the election of controversial gadfly Dale Washam as assessor-treasurer as an example of why primary elections offer an important opportunity to re-evaluate candidates.

A spokesperson for McCarthy said the auditor was not available for an interview on RCV. Emailed questions for the auditor were not answered.

Times and elections have changed

Much has changed for Washington voters in the last decade or so: They cast ballots by mail, postage paid. At 16 and 17 years old, they can pre-register.

Republicans have invoked past RCV experience while justifying their votes against the bill in committee. But Rep. Jim Walsh, an Aberdeen Republican, pointed to how different the voting environment is now.

Walsh argued the reform may “change political lines” and give access to what he called “unexpected minorities,” such as conservative candidates in Democratic districts.

“The times have changed, and technology helps a little bit, and I think people’s understanding of the electoral process has evolved, too,” Walsh said. “And I am hopeful this time, if this bill becomes law, local jurisdictions may have more success.”

There are a few issues with looking to Pierce County as an example, contends Colin Cole, policy director for FairVote Washington. Cole co-founded the organization, which has advocated for RCV legislation since 2016.

First, Pierce County adopted RCV to avoid the pick-a-party primary. When they repealed it, that was no longer a factor. And Cole thinks there’s a good argument that Washam would’ve won anyway.

But Washam had a long track record of running unsuccessfully for public office, including a 2004 campaign for the assessor-treasurer position he ultimately won with RCV in place. In 2004, he lost to the incumbent by a margin of 41 percent to 59 percent. In 2008, he was up against five candidates that included three political veterans.

He got the most votes every round of RCV — about 25 percent the first round, with the experienced candidates splitting most remaining votes three ways. The inclusion of second- and third-choice votes increased Washam’s tally, and he ultimately won in Round 4 with just under 52 percent.

“Voters sometimes elect unqualified candidates regardless of the system used,” Cole said.

Cole also contends that other jurisdictions using it around the U.S. have created a blueprint that others can follow with less expense.

While technology has advanced, Augino said that actually adds “layers of complexity” to the process, offering as an example that staff will need to review and audit vendors’ systems.

In the end, the Secretary of State’s office implements state and federal law. If the bill moves forward, Augino said roles and responsibilities of local jurisdictions and the state need to be clarified. That would, in turn, help sort out where costs would fall.

She stressed the need for voter education — and so does Washington for Equitable Representation.

“We’re not going to go away after legislation passes,” Monaco said. The organization plans to be out in communities, making sure people know how the new system works.

The system will be used on “hyperlocal, down-ticket races” if the bill passes, sponsor Rep. Harris-Talley said. Plus, jurisdictions have to choose to use it.

“I understand any time there’s a structural change to a system, people have anxiety,” Harris-Talley said. “And I heard all those same excuses when we had postage-paid ballots. And none of it came to bear.”

Correction: This story originally indicated that Rep. Debra Lekanoff is the first Native American woman to serve in the state House of Representatives and/or that she’s the only serving in the Legislature. However, the House does not keep an official record of the background of its members, according to a House Democrats spokesperson.

Sen. Lois Stratton, who served in the House from 1979 to 1985, was a member of the Spokane Tribe, according to an online biography and her obituary in The Spokesman-Review. A “Political Pioneers” profile for Rep. Gladys Phillips, who served in the House from 1950 to 1952, notes her father was Native American. The caucus spokesperson confirmed Lekanoff is not the first, and that they do not know if others are serving who do not wish to self-identify as Native American. The story has been corrected.

This story was originally published February 21, 2021 at 5:45 AM with the headline "Could ranked choice voting make elections more equitable? Washington may find out."