Why We Like RCV
Why RCV would benefit Kansas
RCV ensures candidates win with support from a majority of voters.
In our current voting system, candidates can win an election by getting the most votes even if most voters do not support them. In a race with three candidates, one of them could win with 34% of the vote. They would win even if two-thirds of the voters preferred a different candidate. With RCV, the winner will have support from a true majority of voters.
RCV allows voters to vote for the candidate they like the most instead of voting against the one they like the least.
Ranked-choice voting gives voters the ability to vote for their favorite candidate. They do not need to worry about splitting the vote and letting their least favorite candidate win. Instead of voting against the "greater of two evils," voters rank their choices in order of preference. If their favorite candidate doesn't do well, their next choice will count. No votes are wasted.
With RCV, independent, third-party, and moderate party candidates can be viable candidates in a general election. This will help improve the diversity of thought.
RCV leads to more civil campaigns and communities and builds consensus.
Candidates in RCV elections must appeal to a majority of voters by focusing on issues that bring people together. Candidates recognize that, while some voters already have a different first choice, they can aim to be those voters' second choice. To be a voter's second choice, candidates must refrain from campaigning negatively against the voter's first choice.
In districts that use RCV, candidates often work with other candidates to build broad coalitions. These coalitions encourage solid, effective policymaking based on reasonable compromise instead of policies promoting extreme views for the sake of appealing to voters in primary elections.
RCV allows voters to better communicate their preferences.
In many races, there are several candidates in the field who are similar and a couple who are quite different from the rest. Ranked-choice voting allows voters to better express which type of candidate they would like to win. A voter can rank all of the candidates they like in order of preference at the top of their ballot and either rank the candidates they dislike at the bottom of their list or not rank them at all.
RCV saves money and time on run-offs and primaries and reduces money in politics.
Since our current first-past-the-post system (i.e., plurality voting) works best with only two candidates, most elections in our country are held in two parts: 1) a primary that narrows the field to two candidates chosen by voters registered with a party, and 2) a general election by all registered voters. Ranked-choice voting allows a clear victor to be determined regardless of the number of candidates in the race, making some primaries, like the nonpartisan primaries in local elections, unnecessary.
Doing away with local primaries or runoff elections not only reduces the amount government needs to spend on elections but also the amount of money local candidates need to spend in their races. This can go a long way toward reducing the amount of money in local politics and the real or perceived conflicts of interest created by campaign contributions to local politicians.
Our members like ranked-choice voting because
"Politics isn't binary." ~Scott, Wichita
“In a RCV system, candidates will need to appeal to what brings us together rather than what drives us apart.” ~Ryan, Overland Park
"I want to vote my conscience without fear of the worst candidate winning." ~Elaine, Wichita
"It elects candidates with a true majority of the vote, which allows better representation for all." ~Kent, Garden City
"It restores civility to the campaigning process." ~Cindy, Wichita
"It levels the playing field for all candidates and voters." ~James, Overland Park
"If a candidate wins with 45% of the vote, that means 55% voted against them. 55%. Against! RCV fixes that." ~Fred, Prairie Village
"With ranked-choice voting, a majority of voters will have voted, at some level, for the candidate. This more closely links the officeholder with his/her constituents." ~John, Lenexa