This piece is a response to the recent piece published by State Rep. Chris Rosario (D-128), called “We must ensure Ranked Choice Voting works for all of CT”. I respect Rep. Rosario’s commitment to his constituents, and his concern for how Ranked Choice Voting may impact them. However, I do not think RCV actually causes any of the problems he suggests.
In his article, Rep. Rosario lists three primary issues he has concerning Ranked Choice Voting. These are: 1. Voter confusion and disenfranchisement, 2. Representation for marginalized communities, and 3. Gentrification and empowerment of more affluent communities. In an effort to increase understanding about RCV, I want to tackle each of these one-by-one.
Many opponents of Ranked Choice Voting have argued that it would confuse voters, especially amongst voters who don’t speak English. It is true that RCV is more complicated than our current “first-past-the-post” system. But that isn’t an indicator of RCV’s complexity; it’s an indicator of FPTP’s simplicity. It is a simple “whoever gets the most votes wins” system. Any alternate voting system will be more complicated than our current one, because first-past-the-post is the most basic voting system in existence.
Despite this increased complexity of RCV, voters have proven capable of understanding it. In just the United States, two states (Maine and Alaska) use it for all elections, with many other states using it for party primaries, while major cities like New York have adopted it for local elections. New York City in particular is a good case-study for Rep. Rosario’s concerns.
Representative Rosario worries about the effects among ‘non-English speakers’. Well, around 25% of New Yorkers are not English-proficient, with almost 70% of the city being non-white. Yet, ranked-choice voting succeeded. The first citywide elections run by RCV in 2021 saw the highest voter turnout since 1989, according to a Fairvote report. That same report shows 87% of those voters ranking multiple candidates, reflecting that non-English speakers can certainly understand the system.
Rep. Rosario’s second concern is that Ranked Choice Voting may “reduce the political influence of marginalized communities.” Reading again from the Fairvote report, the 2021 NYC election saw over two-thirds of City Council members won by candidates of color. A majority of all candidates were women, more than twice as many as before that election.
Additionally, the very nature of RCV would only enhance the power of marginalized communities. It would allow them to vote for third parties or independents that represent their community better than their local Republican or Democrat, without having to worry about splitting the vote. Grassroots figures could rise much more easily, as RCV helps candidates work around the two-party system, rather than forcing them to work through it.
Rosario’s final concern was the “Gentrification and empowerment of more affluent communities.” To be honest, I don’t completely understand this concern. RCV is not concerned with wealth. Nothing about it would enhance the influence of wealthier residents any more than our current voting system does. Wealth allows influence when it comes to donations or advertisement; neither of which are affected by ranked-choice voting.
I greatly respect State Rep. Rosario’s dedication to his constituents, and his desire to properly represent any concerns they may have. However, while his concerns about ranked-choice voting may be based on the concern of his constituents, they are not based on any genuine flaw behind ranked-choice voting.
Ranked-choice voting is a completely safe, understandable and representative voting system, and I hope State Rep. Rosario comes to the same conclusion.
Mathew Biadun is from Bristol. He studies history and political-science at Eastern Connecticut State University.