Opinion: The Problem with Plurality - a case for Ranked Choice Voting

Submitted by Brian Biales
------------
I'm writing this today, after I've already voted in the Democratic primary in Middletown, but before we get to see the results.

First I have to say kudos to all four candidates who are running.  I really believe that all four of them would put 100% effort at being a great mayor and doing what they believe to be best for the city and its residents. Of course I, and everyone voting today, feels that some would be better at it than others, and that is why we vote. 

There are many things a voter should consider when choosing a candidate for any office, be it Mayor, Representative, Senator, or the President.  Here is an incomplete list of some key ones:
  -  Is the candidate's moral compass and judgment and values in line with yours?
  -  Is the candidate qualified to do the job?
  -  Does the candidate have a resume that proves they can lead an executive branch with 600 or so employees?
  -  Does the candidate's vision for what's most important for the city match yours?
  -  Does the candidate's stated policies and agenda make sense to you, and do you think the candidate can make them happen?
  -  Can the candidate represent the city at the regional and state level positively and effectively?
  -  Is the candidate well prepared to win against the chosen candidate of the other party?

And the list can go on.  The fact is that all of the candidates are human, with different experiences and ideas and personalities, skills and weaknesses, and none will get a 100% match on all of these criteria.  A responsible voter will weight each of these, consciously or unconsciously, and rank the candidates accordingly.

Which brings me to the topic of this post.

If the decision of who should be the Democratic candidate were decided by caucus or convention, I think the process (and quite possibly the outcome) would be a lot different than this process of a primary. In a caucus or convention, if none of the candidates wins a majority, then the vote is taken again and again (with some wheeling and dealing in between) until one of the candidates receives a majority.  This ensures that for those whose first choice candidate is unable to muster a majority of support, participants then get to choose which of the remaining candidates to support. Eventually as some candidates drop out, one of the remaining candidates reaches a majority.   

When voting in federal, state, or local elections in Connecticut, and this is true in this primary as well, one only needs to win a plurality of the vote (more votes than any other candidate).  A majority of the vote (over 50%) is not required.  This works just fine if you have one endorsed candidate and one challenger, since with just two candidates, unless they tie, one will have a majority and the other will not.  However, once you have three or more (and the more there are, the more this becomes a problem), it becomes less and less likely that any of the candidates will receive a majority. And if your favorite candidate does not get the most votes, you get no say at all who, among the remaining candidates, wins.

I will illustrate this issue with a hypothetical situation. The issue being addressed is related to the number of candidates running in any election. This is not, in any way, an issue particular to this election. If you think I am implying below that there are three candidates in this election that are glaringly more qualified than the fourth, I am not. 

What if, in a four way race, you feel three of the candidates are really, really strong candidates. Perhaps if you just change your weightings on the criteria a little bit, one candidate floats the top, change it just a little the other way, and another candidate floats to the top. Tweak it just a little bit and the third candidate floats to the top.  But under no weightings does the fourth candidate reach the same level as the other three.

Let's then say that the 4th candidate has his or her supporters, and musters 30% of the vote.  Now suppose that in a one on one vote with the 4th candidate, each of the other three would win.  But each also has their own minority of strong supporters.  Let's say they are so evenly matched that they split the rest of the votes evenly.  So in this scenario, each would get 1/3 of of the remaining 70%, which is between 23% and 24% each. 

While each of these voters really believed their candidate was the best, if their candidate were not in the race for some reason, these 70% of the voters would be satisfied choosing between the other two, but would not support the 4th candidate.  And yet, when requiring only a plurality of the vote, in this scenario, with 30% of the votes and 70% opposed, this 4th candidate still wins the election.

I bring this issue up because we have an unprecedented four way primary race today.  If the candidate I voted for does not win, I have no confidence that my second choice will win.  In effect I've made it harder for my second choice to win.  Had I known that my candidate would not have enough votes to win from the start, I would have gladly voted for my second choice.  But how would I know that for sure before the vote? I cannot. You have to see there is a serious problem with a simple plurality vote as the number of candidates running gets larger and larger.

I would like to see the DTC, the city of Middletown, the major parties, as well as the state and federal governments take this issue seriously, and consider changing the way we vote to a ranked vote system of some sort.  I believe it is the best if not only way to ensure the candidate with the most voter support wins the election.

This is not a new idea, and yet there are a lot of people who either don't know about it or simply have never really given thought to it. 

There are currently 7 states with cities or counties that use some form of "Ranked Choice Voting" or RCV for short. Maine is the only state where RCV is implemented at the state level, and there are 5 more states (including Massachusetts - in Cambridge and Amherst) that have adopted but not yet implemented RCV. 

You can learn more at this site
https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)

or simply search "ranked choice voting" and you will find articles, both pro and against, to learn more.