Ranked Choice Voting: A Brief History for Maine and the Nation

Ranked choice voting has recently taken center stage following the November 5 election, during which a number of critical state, local, and federal races were on the ballot.

In the days that have followed, complications have arisen and caused significant delays in the tabulation process for the race between incumbent Rep. Jared Golden (D) and Maine State Rep. Austin Theriault (R-Fort Kent).

Because neither of these candidates were found to have over fifty percent of votes cast — due in large part to a significant number of “blank” first-choice selections and the presence of a declared write-in candidate — the state was forced to initiate ranked choice procedures.

[RELATED: BREAKING — Maine CD-2 Race Headed for “Ranked Choice Voting” Disaster as Golden Falls Below 50%]

After an initial ranked choice tabulation, Rep. Golden claimed victory when the count showed him as having secured more than fifty percent of the vote in District 2.

Shortly thereafter, a spokesperson for Rep. Theriault’s campaign confirmed that a recount would be pursued in light of the extraordinarily close margins.

“With the race for Maine’s Second Congressional District remaining the closest federal race in modern Maine history following the allocation of ranked choice votes, we are renewing our call for a state-funded automatic recount of the results,” Theriault campaign manager Shawn Roderick said.

Sources close to the campaign indicated that the recount could take more than three weeks to complete.

This extensive recount first got underway Monday morning, immediately following the Thanksgiving holiday.

[RELATED: Maine’s CD2 Heads to Recount After Golden Claims RCV Win]

In light of this hotly-contested race, ranked choice voting and its history in the state have garnered newfound attention.

Mainers took the first step toward using ranked choice voting in 2016 when voters approved a citizens initiative by a margin of about 32,000 votes or 4.2 percent, with 388,273 voting in support of the measure and 356,621 in opposition.

Following a recount and certification, “An Act to Establish Ranked-choice Voting” was enacted and set to take effect for the 2018 election.

In 2017, the Maine Senate asked the state Supreme Court to issue an advisory opinion on the Constitutionality of the new law. The Justices unanimously found that the new voting system violated several clauses of the Maine Constitution establishing that state officials must be elected by a plurality, not a majority as ranked choice voting requires.

Under ranked choice voting, if a candidate does not receive at least 50 percent of the votes cast in a given election, the candidate who received the least number of votes is eliminated and officials must consider who that person’s supporters indicated were their second choice. Those votes are then distributed to the appropriate candidates.

Depending upon how many candidates participated in the race and how the votes were divided among them, this process may be repeated multiple times, as it must continue until someone emerges with more than 50 percent support.

In light of the Supreme Court’s 2017 advisory opinion, state lawmakers attempted to delay implementation of ranked choice voting until 2022, approving a clause that would only allowing the law to stand if the state constitution were successfully amended in the meantime to accommodate the majority-based system.

Although this legislation became law without the governor’s signature, a People’s Veto effort ultimately repealed the portion of the bill which would have repealed ranked choice voting in the absence of appropriate constitutional amendments.

The People’s Veto succeeded by more than 21,000 votes, representing nearly 8 percent of ballots cast in the election.

Leading up to the June 2018 election, the Kennebec County Superior Court ordered the Secretary of State to begin using ranked choice voting immediately in the upcoming primary elections.

This marked the first use ranked choice voting in the country.

Ranked choice voting went on to play a major role in the November 2018 election, as the system resulted in longtime Republican District 2 Representative Bruce Poliquin losing his reelection bid, paving the way for Golden to first take office.

The race went to ranked choice voting procedures after neither of these candidates received over fifty percent of the vote in the first round, at which point Golden was narrowly declared the winner.

Based on the results from Round 1 of the election, Poliquin would have won the race, as he received 46.3 percent support, representing a 2,171 vote lead over Golden.

In Round 2, however, Golden emerged victorious with 50.6 percent of the vote, holding a 3,509 vote lead over Poliquin. Two third party candidates participated in the race, resulting in a total of 23,427 votes being transferred in the second round to the two major party candidates.

As a result of this, Poliquin became the first incumbent District 2 representative to lose a reelection bid since 1916.

Due to the novel and historic nature of this race, it garnered coverage from major national news outlets, including the New York Times and NPR.

University of Maine Farmington Professor of Political Science James Melcher shared some thoughts on ranked choice voting with the Maine Wire, noting that “much of the initial energy for RCV came out of frustration by liberals with the 2010 gubernatorial election, in which Paul LePage was elected with 39% of the vote.”

“Strong third party or independent candidates for governor have been far more common in Maine than in other states, making it likely that someone will win with well under half of the vote,” he explained.

Professor Melcher suggested that Golden’s win against Poliquin in 2018 “soured Republicans more on it,” and as a result, “Republican opposition to RCV is overwhelming. “

“I see no reason why RCV should benefit one party or another,” he said. “But Republicans understandably saw it as a way to get back at Republicans and keep them from winning elections.”

“I think the advocates of RCV in those years made a big mistake in tying the drive for RCV so much to irritation with LePage,” he added. “They could have pointed out that RCV in gubernatorial elections would have also kicked in in many other races, such as the previous election when Democratic candidate John Baldacci won with less of the vote than LePage — 37%.”

According to Melcher, one of the most common arguments in favor of ranked choice voting is that it leads to more civil elections — as candidates would be vying not only to be voters’ first choice, but also their second or third — but he doesn’t believe it is effective in doing so.

“I can see where it could do that, but I am not persuaded it works that well to that end,” he explained. “Any effect it might have toward gentler rhetoric can be overwhelmed easily by outside money that doesn’t have an interest in a more civil race.”

Another typical argument made in support of ranked choice voting is that it will help to give third party and independent candidates a better shot at winning, as “people can ‘vote sincerely’ for their true preferred choice with less concern that they will be ‘wasting their vote,’ or voting for someone they really don’t prefer to block the other major candidate. “

Despite feeling that this would be good in theory, Melcher indicated that he does not believe ranked choice voting has as big an impact on election outcomes in this respect as people may think it would.

“I think in theory that is a good thing. RCV lets voters cast a more detailed vote that encourages sincere voting, and that’s a better measure of what people want,” Melcher said. “But it may not do as much to affect the outcome as people think it will.

Regardless of its practical impact, however, Melcher highlighted how the ranked choice voting system can, and potentially has, been used as a means for voters to express discontent with a particular candidate, citing this year’s race in District 2 as an example.

“It also offers an avenue to cast a protest vote that won’t change the outcome,” he said. “The supporters of the write in candidate who ran largely as a vehicle to argue against American policy in the Israel-Gaza conflict could get votes that called attention to their position as those votes became key in the RCV tabulations.”

“Some liberals reportedly cast blank first choices and voted for Golden as their second choice to protest what they saw as Golden not being as liberal as they wanted,” he continued. “I think the ability to do that type of vote on any side gives voters a tool to send messages to politicians.”

Melcher went on to speculate that conservatives could employ a similar tactic against Sen. Susan Collins (R) for “being too liberal, without tipping the race to a Democrat,” but felt that would be unlikely since “many Republicans want nothing to do with RCV at all.”

With respect to whether or not ranked choice voting is too confusing for voters, Melcher explained “some early research on RCV in San Francisco suggested it might be.”

“There were also stories in this election about people not understanding how it worked (voting for one candidate for president for all five choices, for example),” he added.

Despite this, Melcher said that he hears “less of those issues now than when it started, and [thinks] this is less of a concern than it was in the past,” citing a survey from Fair Vote — a ranked choice voting advocate — acknowledging that “some might be skeptical of a poll of which they were a cosponsor.”

Nationwide, ranked choice voting is not a common means by which citizens cast their ballots in primary or general. To date, the system has only been approved statewide in Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington DC.

That said, there are a number of municipalities that have adopted ranked choice voting for local elections, including in California, New York, Minnesota, and others.

Alaska narrowly rejected an effort in November to repeal its open primary and ranked choice voting system, with just 737 votes separating support from opposition, representing only .2 percent of votes cast.

According to Alaska Public Media, the campaign against the repeal of ranked choice voting drew nearly $14 million in contributions, largely from out of state, outspending the campaign in support of the repeal by a margin of 100-to-1.

Although recounts are not automatic except in instances of a tie, a recount is still possible under state law.

Phil Izon, who led the campaign in support of the repeal, told Alaskan media that he planned to submit a recount request but was “not optimistic” it would change the outcome. He also indicated plans to petition for a similar ballot measure to go before voters in 2026.

An effort in Colorado to implement a form of statewide ranked choice voting similar to Alaska’s was rejected by a substantial margin of 210,196 votes representing 7 percent of ballots cast.

Idaho voters overwhelmingly rejected open primaries and ranked choice voting with seven out of ten voters casting their votes in opposition to it at the ballot box, resulting in a difference of 348,793 votes.

Nevada also saw a rejection of open primaries and ranked choice voting by a margin of 5.92 percent, or nearly 84,000 votes.

Oregon voters considered implementing a form of ranked choice voting similar to Maine’s where a ranking system would be utilized for both primary and general elections, rejecting it by a resounding 15.48 percent.

Click Here for More Information About Ranked Choice Voting in Maine