Congressman Jamie Raskin (MD-08) and Congressman Don Beyer (VA-08) renewed their efforts to bring ranked choice voting to U.S. congressional elections, reintroducing their *Ranked Choice Voting Act *. Senator Peter Welch (D-VT) is introducing companion legislation in the Senate.

The legislation would require ranked choice voting (RCV) in all congressional primary and general elections starting in 2028, allowing voters to express support for multiple candidates for public office, with the candidate receiving the most votes declared the winner.

103 points

It’ll never go anywhere but I’m absolutely in favor of it. Where it’s been used, it’s shown to move candidates more to the middle to attract both sides, thus reducing extremism.

permalink
report
reply
52 points

I think in the US the more important result would be getting more people to the polls who for now think or are told their third party vote is a spoiler (which it can be, and needs to change). Those people might tend to put Democrat as a secondary vote, and while the third parties won’t win national races yet, they’ll get more voice and more reason to campaign. Instead of just popping up every four years…right Jill?

permalink
report
parent
reply
87 points

This would be an unprecedented win for democracy in America, but it needs an outcry of public support to have any chance.

Look up your congressional reps here: https://www.270towin.com/elected-officials/ and contact them to urge their support.

Remember, we’re not outnumbered, we’re out organized.

permalink
report
reply
23 points

I actually think this is one issue that is okay to be a single issue voter on, because once it’s achieved then all voting afterwards will be fairer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

i mean, i would disagree, but i see what you’re pushing for here.

This is an issue that exceeds the importance of almost all other issues, aside from like, the immediate danger that electing trump would have.

you should still vote, but push really hard for voting reform, shit’s important.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah exactly, I was being a bit hyperbolic there but I do think this is a unifying issue for pretty much anyone from any party.

Funny enough the other thing that really gets people under 50 going is talking about high speed rail done well and effectively here as public transportation. Something conservative men really like about trains lol, I’ll take it

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

My rep is Peter Welch!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Woop!!

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

based bill. Voting reform is possible my dudes. Even if this shit fails, you can still push for it at a state level.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Or after November 😅

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

hey, multiple avenues of success is more success. This looks like it would only require federal voting reform on a congress level, idk if it says anything about presidential, or electoral votes. But even on a state level there are more places where voting is usefully reformed. Your local government for instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

My state has it. The Republicans oppose it by saying to to hard basically admitting their base is to stupid to vote.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

There is evidence that poor voters submit invalid RCV ballots at a higher rate than middle class and rich voters, something that isn’t true under FPTP. It’s impossible to submit an invalid ballot under Approval Voting, so that’s another mark in its favor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

This is not a condemnation of the voting system, but the obtuse way the ballot forms are presented. I wonder who hamstrings the committees that design the forms….

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’d have to look at the specific ballots in question. The study I’m thinking of was concerning the NYC mayor election, so it was likely designed by Democrats, but I don’t remember seeing a picture of the actual ballot in the study.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Which is a prime example of how approval is a superior voting system. It is simpler than RCV, so they can’t make dumb arguments like that to begin with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

That’s not the issue though, the issue is that they’ll use it as an excuse to block progress.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

With the Republican Party fracturing, you’d think they would welcome this change. It would help them get elected. But they aren’t smart enough to realize that.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

With the Republican Party fracturing

Says who? I see very little evidence that it is doing anything but switfly radicalizing while remaining cohesive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

The New Republic, an online magazine, was created, and is run by Republicans who are absolutely against Trump and those like him. And then there are the Republicans from times gone by that are even speaking out against him and his.

Edit: hell the acronym RINO , Republican in name only, was created by Trump and company. It refers to republicans who don’t see things his way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The term RINO has actually been around for a long time, since George H Bush.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The term “Republican in name only” was used in the 1920s and the 1950s, then in the Ronald Reagan-era 1980s. The term “RINO” appears in print in December 1992 in an article from Manchester, New Hampshire. -source

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

it would probably fuck them harder, as they would have to “collectivize” for lack of a better term that i cannot remember right now. Far right and MAGA might. But moderate republicans are extremely unlikely to do this, as well as swing voters. It would probably single handedly kill the chances of trump ever winning again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It wouldn’t screw them over until a legitimate third party is in place. And then maybe. But you have to ask yourself what a third party looks like if it looks like an alternative to both parties. Surely the first third party would just be a split between the parties, it would still take them awhile to win anything at all. But I could see alternatives being a more eco focused party and I honestly think it would screw both major parties. Which is the ideal case. If anything, this screws the dems more because of their voters are more likely to break rank with how the party is going.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

i think the moderate voters, both republican and democrat would immediately fuck them over, though the moderate dems are more likely to align and side with current democratic representation, and possibly future as well, just due to fundamental values, so it’s less of a problem for the left.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 462K

    Comments