National Implications of Maine Adoption of Ranked Choice Voting
In: National civic review: making citizen democracy work, Band 106, Heft 1, S. 20-24
ISSN: 1542-7811
12 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: National civic review: making citizen democracy work, Band 106, Heft 1, S. 20-24
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: National civic review: publ. by the National Municipal League, Band 89, Heft 1, S. 95
ISSN: 0027-9013
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 85, Heft 1, S. 45-51
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 82, Heft 3, S. 273-281
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 94, Heft 4, S. 44-46
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: National civic review: publ. by the National Municipal League, Band 94, Heft 4, S. 44-46
ISSN: 0027-9013
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 90, Heft 2, S. 183-188
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 97, Heft 2, S. 52-56
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 89, Heft 1, S. 95-110
ISSN: 1542-7811
In: Politics and governance, Band 9, Heft 2, S. 354-364
ISSN: 2183-2463
Grounded in experience in 2020, both major political parties have reasons to expand use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in their 2024 presidential primaries. RCV may offer a 'win-win' solution benefiting both the parties and their voters. RCV would build on both the pre-1968 American tradition of parties determining a coalitional presidential nominee through multiple ballots at party conventions and the modern practice of allowing voters to effectively choose their nominees in primaries. Increasingly used by parties around the world in picking their leaders, RCV may allow voters to crowd-source a coalitional nominee. Most published research about RCV focuses on state and local elections. In contrast, this article analyzes the impact on voters, candidates, and parties from five state Democratic parties using RCV in party-run presidential nomination contests in 2020. First, it uses polls and results to examine how more widespread use of RCV might have affected the trajectory of contests for the 2016 Republican nomination. Second, it contrasts how more than three million voters in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries backed withdrawn candidates with the low rate of such wasted votes for withdrawn candidates in the states with RCV ballots. Finally, it concludes with an examination of how RCV might best interact with the parties' current rules and potential changes to those rules.
Grounded in experience in 2020, both major political parties have reasons to expand use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in their 2024 presidential primaries. RCV may offer a 'win-win' solution benefiting both the parties and their voters. RCV would build on both the pre-1968 American tradition of parties determining a coalitional presidential nominee through multiple ballots at party conventions and the modern practice of allowing voters to effectively choose their nominees in primaries. Increasingly used by parties around the world in picking their leaders, RCV may allow voters to crowd-source a coalitional nominee. Most published research about RCV focuses on state and local elections. In contrast, this article analyzes the impact on voters, candidates, and parties from five state Democratic parties using RCV in party-run presidential nomination contests in 2020. First, it uses polls and results to examine how more widespread use of RCV might have affected the trajectory of contests for the 2016 Republican nomination. Second, it contrasts how more than three million voters in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries backed withdrawn candidates with the low rate of such wasted votes for withdrawn candidates in the states with RCV ballots. Finally, it concludes with an examination of how RCV might best interact with the parties' current rules and potential changes to those rules.
BASE
The Symposium Welcome was given by Clint A. Nichols, the Allen Chair Editor for the University of Richmond Law Review, and Wendy C. Perdue, Dean & Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law. The "Get out the vote?" session was presented by Keesha M. Gaskins, Senior Counsel with the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University; Steven F. Huefner, Professor of Law and Director of Clinical Programs at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law; Joshua N. Lief, Senior Assistant Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia; and Michael J. Pitts, Professor of Law and Dean's Fellow at Indiana University's Robert H. McKinney School of Law. The "Third Parties to the Process" session was presented by Jocelyn F. Benson, Associate Professor of Law at Wayne State University Law School; Joshua A. Douglas, Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law; and Rebecca Green, Professor of the Practice of Law and Co-Director of the Election Law Program at the William & Mary Law School. The "Drawing the Lines" session was presented by Keesha M. Gaskins, Senior Counsel with the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University; Dale Ho, Assistant Counsel with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Dr. Michael P. McDonald, Associate Professor of Government and Politics at George Mason University; Donald Palmer, Secretary of the Virginia State Board of Elections; and Rob Richie, Executive Director of FairVote.
BASE