Ranked-choice voting and open primaries are two bad ideas whose time has most assuredly not come. Both ideas were on the ballots of several states this election year, and despite proponents of both bad ideas literally pouring bushel baskets of cash into their campaigns to get these things passed, they failed – almost everywhere.
Two weeks before Election Day, activists from across the country gathered for an online rally heralding the historic number of state ballot initiatives seeking to change the way people vote. Hopes were high that voters would ditch traditional partisan primaries and embrace ballots with more candidate choices.
Instead, the election reform movement lost almost everywhere it appeared on a statewide ballot.
“It turns out, in retrospect, we weren’t yet ready for prime time,” said John Opdycke, president of the advocacy group Open Primaries, which organized the rally.
In Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and South Dakota — a mixture of red, blue and purple states — voters rejected either ranked choice voting, open primaries or a combination of both.
These are bad ideas – but why?
First, open primaries. We have political parties for a reason: to allow each side to put forth the candidates that the members of that party deem the best to represent their interests. It is counter-productive to have non-Republicans in effect telling Republicans who their candidate should be, and honestly, the converse also holds true. Democrats should not have non-Democrats influencing who the Democratic candidate should be.
Second, ranked-choice voting (RCV), which also in effect requires an open primary. The principle of one voter, one vote is violated by these systems, which are complex and, for many, confusing. In Alaska’s first outing of this system, I overheard complaining about this system – along with comments along the lines of “I’m voting my first choice and that’s it.” This year, it appears that no election outcomes were changed in the RCV tallies, but in 2022 the RCV system was largely seen as easing Mary Peltola’s way to an election victory, in part because she had two Republican challengers. That did not happen this year, and she was unseated in favor of Republican Nick Begich III.
See Related: Alaska Election Preview: Will the Last Frontier Ditch Ranked-Choice Voting?
WINNING: Republican Nick Begich III Wins Alaska House At-Large Seat
Alaska’s Final Vote Tally Is Done: Ranked-Choice Repeal Failed, But There Was Some Good News
But, while the proponents of RCV and open primaries outspent the opponents by wide margins, they still failed.
Election reform advocates raised about $110 million for the statewide ballot measures, vastly outpacing their opponents, according to an Associated Press analysis of campaign finance figures that could grow even larger as post-election reports are filed. Still, their promotional push wasn’t enough to persuade most voters.
That is, they failed everywhere but Alaska. Our RCV system was voted in by a razor-thin margin in 2020, and the repeal failed by a similarly razor-thin margin in 2024, despite the pro-repeal side being outspent by huge margins, including a great deal of dark money poured in from “Outside.”
Another repeal effort is already getting organized for 2026. Alaskans don’t give up easily. And the tide appears to be turning against this bad idea.
Academic research also has cast doubt on the benefits of ranked-choice voting, said Larry Jacobs, a professor of politics at the University of Minnesota. Fewer Black voters tend to rank candidates than white voters, he said, and there is little evidence that ranked-choice voting reduces political polarization or negative campaigning.
“I think the tide for ranked choice voting is turning away from it,” Jacobs said.
One voter, one vote should be the rule. And, this year, the forces for that basic principle won – bigly. And up here in the Great Land, we may be delayed, but we ain’t beat.
