Vote November 2024 To Remove Rank Choice Voting
Vote November 2024 To Remove Rank Choice Voting
President Trump Visits Alaska 2022
President Trump expressed strong criticism of ranked-choice voting systems during a rally in Anchorage, Alaska. He specifically targeted Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski, who voted to convict him during his second impeachment trial. Trump accused her of being responsible for the state adopting ranked-choice voting, which he referred to as "ranked choice crap voting."
Trump said that ranked-choice voting makes it difficult to determine the winner and can result in candidates with lower rankings winning the election. He referred to the system as "a total rigged deal.”
The crowd at the Freedom Rally shared Trump's sentiment, booing the idea of ranked-choice voting and expressing mistrust in the ranking process. Many rally attendees indicated that they prefer to vote for only one candidate with a No. 1 ranking, rejecting the concept of ranking multiple candidates.
“A Total Rigged Deal”
-President Donald Trump
Coming Soon!!!
Get Your Gear & Support Alaska’s Fight Against Ranked Choice Voting
Set Alaska Free From RCV
Set Alaska Free From RCV
Make sure to join our newsletter and provide a phone number. We will be reaching out throughout the year to remind everyone to Vote in November to Repeal Ranked Choice Voting.
Join Our Newsletter
Alaska Had The Lowest Voter Turnout In The History of the State Using RCV
In 2022, First Use Of Ranked Choice Voting (44.38%)
In 2023 The DC Democrats Sued to Block Ranked Choice Voting in D.C.
Ranked Choice Voting Eliminates 3rd Party Candidates
Implementation of Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) has raised questions about its effect on third-party candidates, as exemplified by their absence in the 2022 US Senate Election in Alaska. While attributing this solely to RCV is challenging, the combination of RCV and the top 4 general election format might have influenced the decisions of third-party candidates and their supporters. The absence of third-party candidates in Alaska underscores the need for further investigation into RCV's impact on candidate participation.
Analyzing data from the Maine Senate and House of Representatives elections between 2016 and 2022, as well as the Alaska State Senate and House elections from 2020 to 2022, provides little evidence to suggest that RCV benefits third-party candidates. In the Maine Senate, Democrats gained 7 seats, while Republicans lost 7 seats, with no third-party candidates winning seats during this period. Similarly, in the Maine House of Representatives, Democrats gained 5 seats, Republicans lost 5 seats, and Independents lost 1 seat. This resulted in a net gain of 12 seats for Democrats and no significant presence of third-party candidates.
In Alaska's State Senate elections from 2020 to 2022, Democrats gained 2 seats, while Republicans lost 2 seats, and the number of independent candidates remained unchanged. In Alaska's State House elections during the same period, Democrats lost 1 seat, Republicans saw no change, and there was an increase of 1 Independent candidate. These results suggest that RCV did not lead to significant changes in the representation of third-party candidates in Alaska's State Senate and House.
The combination of data from Alaska and Maine raises doubts about the assumption that RCV inherently benefits third-party candidates. While it is crucial to consider the specific context of each election and voting system, the absence of third-party candidates in these elections implies that RCV alone may not be adequate to create a favorable environment for their success. Further research is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between RCV, third-party candidates, and democratic representation.
Additionally, aside from the aforementioned data, it is noteworthy that the introduction of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in certain elections coincided with seat shifts to the Democratic Party. In the 2018 Maine US House Election, the first year of RCV usage, a seat switched to the Democratic Party. Similarly, in the 2022 Alaska House Election, which also coincided with the initial RCV implementation, a seat was won by the Democrats. These instances highlight specific races where RCV may have played a role in influencing the outcome and benefiting the Democratic Party.
When assessing the overall impact of RCV on seat outcomes, it is crucial to examine the broader perspective. In the Maine State Legislature, Democrats won a total of 12 seats during the specified period, indicating an increase in Democratic representation. Furthermore, the Democratic Party secured one U.S. Congressional seat in both Maine and Alaska, along with two Alaska State Senate seats. These victories suggest a degree of success for the Democratic Party in elections where RCV was utilized.
Ranked Choice Voting Hurts Alaskan Natives and Minorities Disproportionately According to a Study at Princeton University
This article highlights concerns about Ranked Choice Voting (RCV), particularly regarding its impact on Native Alaskan and Native American voters. A study by Princeton University Professor Nolan McCarty, conducted for the Center for Election Confidence, suggests that RCV may disproportionately harm these groups. The study found higher rates of "ballot exhaustion" in Alaska's Native precincts. This term describes situations where a voter's ballot is discarded because they only ranked candidates who were eliminated. Such patterns suggest that RCV might diminish the electoral influence of Native Alaskan and Native American voters.
In addition, the Native Americans for Sovereignty and Preservation (NASP) has expressed opposition to RCV. NASP argues that RCV is confusing and might discourage voting among their communities. They advocate for electoral reforms to ensure transparency, fairness, and honesty in elections. Their proposed changes include implementing photo ID requirements for voting, limiting absentee ballots, using safe voting machines, maintaining up-to-date voter lists, and ensuring the accuracy of election information. These measures, according to NASP, are crucial for protecting the voting rights and interests of Native American communities.
Overall, the article brings to light the complexities and potential drawbacks of RCV, especially in its application in areas with significant Native American populations, and underscores the need for careful consideration of how voting reforms affect minority groups.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/01/16/ranked-choice-voting-disenfranchises-minorities-though-favored-by-left-study-finds/
MIT Study Regarding the Claim that Ranked Choice Voting is more Civil
The research investigated the influence of Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) on election campaigns and the level of civility in them. Advocates for RCV argue that it fosters greater civility in campaigns by motivating candidates to seek second-choice votes from supporters of other candidates. However, the study's analysis revealed that negative campaign spending in Maine experienced a significant increase following the implementation of RCV. This suggests that RCV may not necessarily lead to more civil campaigns. Furthermore, the study examined Facebook advertisements that mentioned congressional candidates in Maine during the initial year of RCV adoption and discovered that the 2018 campaign exhibited even more negativity compared to similar districts in other states.
https://electionlab.mit.edu/articles/effect-ranked-choice-voting-maine
Alaska U.S. Senate Race 2022 - Exploring the Impact of Ranked Choice Voting on Alaska's Election Dynamics: A Case of Strategic Voter Behavior
Abstract
This study investigates the transformation of Alaska's electoral system from a traditional closed primary and plurality voting to a Jungle Primary with Top 4 Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in the US Senate elections of 2020 and 2022. The research highlights a dramatic shift in Democratic voter support, plummeting from 41.2% in 2020 to 10.7% in 2022, and explores the possibility of strategic voting influencing this outcome.
Introduction
Alaska's 2022 electoral landscape saw a significant change with the introduction of RCV. This reform was aimed at expanding voter choice and reducing the "spoiler effect." However, the 2022 US Senate election results indicated a drastic shift in Democratic voter support, raising questions about unintended effects of RCV.
Methodology
This paper analyzes data from the 2020 and 2022 US Senate elections in Alaska, comparing the outcomes under the traditional voting system and the new RCV method. Special attention is given to the dramatic change in Democratic candidate support.
Results
The 2020 election saw Republican Dan Sullivan win with 53.9% (191,112 votes), and Democrat Al Gross garner 41.2% (146,068 votes). In stark contrast, the 2022 RCV election saw two Republicans obtain 86% of votes (226,219 votes), while Democratic support nosedived to 10.7% (28,233 votes), the lowest in Alaska's history.
Discussion
This significant 30.5% drop in Democratic support suggests a shift due to RCV. The new system's preference ranking might have led to strategic voting, with some voters only ranking Republicans to prevent a Democratic win. This tactic could have eliminated the Democratic candidate early, favoring Republicans in the final count, indicative of strategic gaming by voters.
Conclusion
The adoption of RCV in Alaska's 2022 Senate election led to an unprecedented decline in Democratic support. This 30.5% decrease from 2020 raises concerns about voters potentially gaming the system to influence election outcomes.
"A Total Rigged Deal.”
President Trump describing Ranked Choice Voting
Alaska Elections Issues in 2022: Do you think it would have made a difference if Al Gross’s name was on the ballot in the U.S. House Race?
The race went from 2 Republicans vs 2 Democrats, to 2 Republicans vs 1 Democrat (allowing the possibility of splitting the Republican Vote)
“The Division (of Elections) Failed To Strictly Comply With Election Law Deadlines.” Alaska Supreme Court
“On June 21, 2022 — 56 days before the special general election and the regular primary election — Dr. Al Gross filed his withdrawal from both elections. At that time, preliminary special election results indicated that Dr. Gross had the third most votes in the special primary election, followed by Mary Peltola with the fourth most votes and Tara Sweeney with the fifth most votes.
Though the parties did not raise the issue of Dr. Gross’s name being removed from the special general election ballot, we are troubled by the Division’s apparent failure to abide by the statute and its own regulations in this regard. Under our interpretation of AS 15.25.100, unless a candidate withdraws “after the primary election and 64 or more days before the general election,” the Division “shall place on the general election ballot only the names of the four candidates receiving the greatest number of votes for an office.” This language makes clear that, had the Division strictly followed the law, Dr. Gross’s name should have remained on the special general election ballot. Similarly, under 6 AAC 25.210(b), the 64-day replacement deadline applies to removing a withdrawn candidate’s name from the general election ballot. Abiding by this regulation would have required the Division to leave Dr. Gross’s name on the ballot” – Alaska Supreme Court April 28th, 2023
Ranked Choice Voting Caused Issues for Oakland Elections and Alaska Elections in 2022
Issues in Oakland, CA with Rank Choice Voting, this happened in the 2022 election.
“Following revelations that the Alameda County Registrar of Voters miscounted ballots for several ranked-choice races in the November election, the Board of Supervisors voted in January to have the registrar conduct recounts of four races—including the narrowly decided Oakland mayor’s race. …But over two months later, the recounts haven’t been conducted, and the registrar of voters told the supervisors Tuesday that it’s almost assured they never will. In December, the registrar of voters issued a press release admitting his team used the wrong settings on elections software to tabulate ranked-choice votes”
“Still, the registrar’s mistake fueled distrust in the results and boosted calls by some groups including the NAACP for a recount in the mayor’s race.”
https://oaklandside.org/2023/03/15/recount-oakland-mayors-race-wont-happen-registrar-2022-election/
Boulder, CO 2023 - Ranked Choice Voting
In the recent Boulder city election, Bob Yates, a former Republican who became unaffiliated in May 2022, initially led in the mayoral race. However, the introduction of ranked choice voting shifted the results. Incumbent Mayor Aaron Brockett, a liberal Democrat, overtook Yates with a lead of 497 votes and is expected to win. This shift is attributed to the second-choice votes from Nicole Speer's supporters, who finished third. Speer was endorsed by the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter.
This election demonstrated the significant impact of ranked choice voting, which pushed Boulder's municipal politics further to the left. Yates, known for his limits on development and growth, had previously won more votes in the 2015 and 2019 council elections than Brockett. Brockett acknowledged that ranked choice voting was a key factor in his likely victory, differentiating it from a plurality winner system.
John Frank, Axioms News, Nov 9, 2023
https://www.axios.com/local/denver/2023/11/09/boulder-mayor-race-ranked-choice-voting-election
U.S. Vice President Walter F. Mondale (D) - Ranked Choice Voting
Reject Effort to Change Duluth's City Charter: A Plea Against Ranked-Choice Voting," Duluth News Tribune, October 31, 2015.
I urge Duluth residents to reject the proposed alteration to their city’s charter by voting “no” on the ranked-choice voting amendment. The essence of voting in America should be straightforward and simple, yet ranked-choice voting fails to meet these standards due to its complexity and confusing nature.
Evidence from various academic studies suggests that affluent and well-educated voters fare well with ranked-choice voting. However, this method often disadvantages other groups, particularly older voters. Thus, for those who believe in a transparent American voting system accessible to all, I urge a “no” vote on ranked-choice voting.
Former Duluth Mayor Don Ness pointed out that during his initial campaign, which included 11 opponents, the introduction of a ranked-choice voting format would have obstructed a genuine debate regarding Duluth’s future. I stand firmly behind this observation.
Consider the 2013 Minneapolis city election where 20% of participating voters were not accounted for in the final round of vote counting for the mayor’s race, embodying the essence of disenfranchisement. Proponents of ranked-choice voting argue that their system ensures a majority winner. However, this was not the case in the Minneapolis mayor’s race nor in two City Council races.
Ranked-choice voting does not promise more democracy but rather favors elites who have learned to navigate this new and complex system. Furthermore, it should be noted that almost a third of the cities that have implemented ranked-choice voting have since repealed it.
Duluth residents have always valued common sense. I trust that this value will be demonstrated on Tuesday when you vote “no” on ranked-choice voting.
Sincerely,
Walter F. Mondale,
Former Vice President of the United States
Perspective of Two Liberal California Governors
In California, two prominent liberal governors have voiced their opposition to ranked choice voting (RCV), highlighting concerns about its complexity and impact on voter understanding. Former Governor Jerry Brown criticized RCV for being overly complicated and confusing, expressing his belief that it deprives voters of a genuinely informed choice. Similarly, Governor Gavin Newsom, in a letter to the California State Senate, declined to sign Senate Bill 212, which would have allowed general law cities, counties, and school districts to adopt RCV. Newsom pointed out that while RCV has been experimented with in several charter cities in California, it often leads to voter confusion. He also questioned the fulfillment of its promise to enhance democracy, suggesting that the state should gather more insights from these charter cities before considering a broader implementation of RCV. Both governors' stances reflect significant skepticism about the efficacy of RCV in promoting clear and democratic electoral processes.
