Know The Truth About Rank Choice Voting Before You Vote
Author: Debbie Churchhill
Know The Truth About Rank Choice Voting Before You Vote
CI-126 amends the Montana Constitution to provide that the top four finishers in the Primary Election will advance to the General Election, regardless of party or no party affiliation. Anyone can run as a Democrat or a Republican OR candidates can choose not to have a party affiliation at all. Voters must conduct exhaustive research on an unknown and unlimited number of candidates in multiple races.
CI-127 amends the Montana Constitution to provide that a candidate MUST win MORE THAN 50% of the vote. Supporters claim that CI-127 would ensure a ‘majority’ winner by requiring the winning candidate to receive more than 50% of the vote. However, this already happens in most Montana elections. In our current system, there are usually only two candidates participating, thus resulting in a majority. They claim to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.
Together, CI-126 and CI-127 amount to a radical, expensive and unnecessary experiment that is guaranteed to make political campaigns longer, more confusing, more expensive, and more dependent on special-interest money. This experiment is referred to as Rank Choice Voting (RCV) or Top 4 Vote.
When Montanans are informed about RCV, a majority of Montanans (more than 60%) oppose CI-126 and CI-127, including Independents, Democrats, and Republicans.
These constitutional initiatives are a back-door attempt to replace our traditional election system with RCV. Currently, RCV is illegal in Montana. In 2023, the Montana Legislature passed HB598 banning RCV in Montana. CI-126 and CI-127 subvert the rule of law in Montana and is destructive to Montana's election process.
So, if RCV is banned in Montana, why are we talking about it? Because out-of-state dark money groups are pouring MILLIONS OF DOLLARS into Montana to put it on the ballot in November. Who is behind RCV?
Montanans for Election Reform (MFER) is the group pushing RCV. MFER is funded and supported by rich, out-of-state, far-left progressive elites and PACs. As of the most recent reporting, MFER has received $4.2 million from out-of-state donors, including George Soros foundations. This money has been spent on advertising, signature-gathering, and propaganda.
In the scenario contemplated with CI-126 and CI-127, 4 candidates would compete in the General Election, making it most likely that no candidate would get a majority of votes. In practice, RCV results in an artificial majority. The winner’s majority is only a majority of the voters remaining in a final round, not a majority of all the voters who actually cast a vote.
If CI-126 and CI-127 both pass, there will be an almost guaranteed runoff election leading to a lengthened election season into December because twice as many candidates will qualify for the General Election OR it will require a RCV scheme to get to a majority.
RCV is the ultimate GOAL of the supporters of CI-126 and CI-127. RCV undermines the ‘One Person – One Vote’ system. Rather than just voting for one candidate, voters are forced to vote for all candidates to ensure their ballots are counted and not thrown out. This includes voting for candidates with whom a voter fundamentally disagrees or lacks sufficient information about AND voters have to rank their votes. Voters have to vote for all candidates in each race rather than one person. The votes of the candidates who are eliminated at the bottom must be reassigned until they get someone who has 50% of the votes.
One of the greatest problems with RCV is “ballot exhaustion” – when a ballot is cast but does not count toward the end election result. This occurs when a voter overvotes, undervotes, or only ranks candidates that are no longer in contention on their ballot. Ballot exhaustion leaves voters and voices uncounted – ballots are literally thrown in the trash because the RCV process renders their votes meaningless. Minority and elderly voters are more likely to have their votes thrown out due to confusion and complexity. It is easier to make a mistake with a more complicated ballot.
Supporters claim that RCV tamps down political extremism. It actually has the opposite effect. In RCV, candidates are not bound by party platforms. In addition, there will be more candidates. When there are more candidates, each running on his/her own personal platform, elections and campaigns will be less about issues and more about personality, resulting in MORE personal attacks, NOT LESS. Candidates will be incentivized to do whatever it takes to gain the most voter recognition, including being bombastic, hyperbolic, and anything other than civil towards his/her competition. Montana politics will become increasingly negative and more polarizing.
Supporters appeal to independent voters by claiming that RCV is an ideal system for them because they can vote for any candidate as their first preference. They aren’t limited to vote for a candidate of a particular party. In reality, RCV is a scheme that makes it harder for independent candidates to win and undermines conservative candidates.
Alaska passed RCV in 2020. We can learn lessons from Alaska.
In the 2020 Alaska US Senate race, there were 5 third-party candidates. After RCV was implemented, there were 0 (zero) third-party candidates in the 2022 US Senate race.
RCV reduces transparency in elections, threatens public trust in the democratic process, and makes it more difficult and expensive to conduct elections. Ballots are more expensive to print because RCV requires multi-page ballots. Alaska spent $534,000 to purchase ballot tabulation equipment. In order to implement RCV, they needed to purchase 137 ballot tabulators. RCV does not allow for hand-counting ballots. All ballots must be scanned and counted by a tabulator for the tabulation grid to be captured. Alaska was the last state in the country to report election results.
RCV reduces voter turnout. In 2022, Alaska experienced a 44% voter turnout, lower than any election in Alaska since 1976 which is as far back as the results go.
RCV requires costly public education campaigns because implementing a major change in elections, especially ones that are more complicated and difficult to understand for the average voter, like RCV, requires voters be educated on how the new system works. Alaska budgeted $150,000 for voter education on RCV. They spent $3.1 million on just voter education.
Ballot Exhaustion is real. In Alaska, more than 15,000 votes were thrown out in 2022.
In Alaska, the person with the most votes didn’t win. If you come in third, you win. 60% of Alaskan voters voted for a Republican, but thanks to a convoluted process and ballot exhaustion – which disenfranchises voters – a Democrat won.
So, now what for Alaska? They are in the process of repealing RCV. It is on their ballot in 2024. The same dark money groups have spent $12M to keep RCV in Alaska.
Let’s learn from Alaska. Vote NO on CI-126 and CI-127.
Debbie Churchill, Retired Attorney, RNC National Committeewoman, MTGOP Grassroots Director
Clancy, MT
