We believe it will reduce negative campaigning (...) because candidates will need to appeal to a broader range of voters for first- and second-choice rankings to build a majority of support.
Ranked-choice voting also helps create a richer and, hopefully, more civil dialogue on the issues and increases the diversity of views available for voters to consider by allowing candidates from outside the two major parties to compete.
—League of Women Voters of Maine
When voters feel like they have to choose between the lesser-of-two-evils, that's not real choice.
Ranked choice voting gives every voter a meaningful vote.
Check out our Activist Toolkit to advocate for better elections with ranked choice voting.
FairVote's brief and timely commentary on the latest news.
by Haley Smith
By October 31st, over 22 million people had cast early votes for the 2016 presidential election. In some states, like Texas and California, the number of early votes was up substantially from 2012. Despite a rise in the number of early votes cast, early returns from the November 8th election suggested turnout was actually at a low, with some outlets reporting that voter turnout was nearly the lowest it had been in a presidential election in 20 years.
Read Moreby Sarah John
On Sabato’s Crystal Ball, Professor Alan I. Abramowitz writes that it is incumbency, not gerrymandering that is the reason the Democrats are unlikely to win a U.S. House majority, even with a Clinton landslide. FairVote agrees, to a point.
Read MoreIn the The Atlantic, Brownstein and Askarinam examine recent voting trends showing that Democrats have gained support in urban areas, whilst Republicans have gained in rural and blue-collar areas.
Read MoreWe need your support. Help us spread the love by pitching in $5 today!