Ranked-choice voting has long been touted by advocates on the left as a democratizing force. But a 2024 Colorado ballot measure that would require immediate runoffs for key state and federal elections was largely planned by the same groups.

In addition to establishing ranked choice voting for the general election, Proposal 131 would implement a Top 4 primary school for gubernatorial, attorney general and federal congressional elections, among others. This new primary process would allow candidates from all parties to compete for four spots on the general election ballot – only candidates with the most primary votes would advance.

The measure would theoretically allow four candidates from the same party to run in a general election (or four candidates from four different parties). Critics say the change would increase the amount of money and effort needed to run a successful political campaign by making primaries as important as the general election.

“Right now Colorado primaries tend to favor people who are more centrist or more connected,” he said Boulder Progressives Board member Lisa Sweeney-Miran. “We don’t think it will solve this problem. We believe it will make the situation worse.”

Essentially, Proposition 131 aims to eliminate Colorado’s primary format and replace it with a winner-take-all system, similar to our current general election process. Critics like Sweeney-Miran say the harm of a so-called “jungle primary” would negate the benefits of an immediate runoff. But advocates have argued that any move toward a ranked-choice voting system is a step in the right direction.

“While Colorado has the best voter integrity and access protections, no election system is perfect.” Gov. Jared Polis posted on Facebook in September. “I think instant runoff voting is better than our current system because it gives voters more choices.”

How does ranking affect policy outcomes?

There’s no way to know in advance exactly how ranked choice voting will affect politics in Colorado, but in recent years political scientists have conducted research that could provide some clues.

Alan Simmons is director of research at the Center for State Policy and Leadership at the University of Illinois Springfield. His research group published a study It examined how ranked choice voting could affect the outcome of a US presidential election. In 2020, Simmons and his staff solicited mock ballots from 62 poll respondents. Half of respondents voted in a ranked-choice format that was clearly explained to them, while the other half voted in a standard format.

The researchers found that the ranked choice system significantly increased support for third-party candidates (Green Party and Libertarian Party candidates).

“People are relieved because they don’t feel like they’re wasting their vote,” Simmons told KUNC.

Interestingly, Simmons and other researchers have also found that ranked voters tend to be more satisfied with election results.

“Your first choice may not win, but your second choice won,” Simmons said. “You still have that advantage. That had to be noted on the paper too.”

While ranked-choice voting is based on extensive academic research, the first four primaries are relatively untested. Alaska became the first state to use the format in 2022. This year Alaska voters will vote on a measure to repeal the system in favor of a partisan primary.

Voter education

According to Simmons, any potential benefits of ranked-choice voting depend on effective voter education. Conversely, voters will not reap the rewards if they do not understand the system.

Molly Fitzpatrick, Boulder County clerk and recorder, echoed that sentiment. Her team monitored the introduction of a new ranked selection system for Boulder’s mayoral race last year. After Boulder voters passed a ballot measure in 2020, they had three years to design, test and implement the system. According to Fitzpatrick, it was just enough time to get the word out.

“We wanted voters to understand what was happening,” Fitzpatrick told KUNC.

Fitzpatrick questioned Proposition 131’s proposed two-year deadline for implementing a statewide ranking system.

“There is currently no governance for a lot of this,” she said. “There are a lot of unanswered questions.”

However, a Senate bill passed last summer Now the new format would have to be tested in a pilot group of local districts before it can be implemented nationwide. The new law could cause a delay to Proposition 131 if passed. advocates, including Governor Polisargue that this delay will give election officials enough time to educate voters and address the flaws in the system.

Is there a better way?

Some critics, including U.S. Representative Lauren Boeberthave spoken out against the ranked choice aspect of Proposition 131. However, most of the counterarguments instead focused on the measure’s top four main clauses.

Opponents point this out Maine’s ranked-choice selection system as a better model. In 2017, the state adopted a ranked-choice system in both primary and general elections for federal seats. The new system keeps primaries partisan, meaning voters choose a single party to cast their primary with.

Critics argue that Proposition 131’s lead proponent, Kent Thiry, has more to gain from a top-four primary than Colorado voters. Thiry is CEO of healthcare company DaVita and has contributed nearly $1.5 million in personal funds to support the effort. according to Ballotpedia.

“Billionaires trying to buy elections have been part of the political problem from the start, and this measure makes it even easier for them to influence the system in their favor,” Shad Murib, chairman of the Colorado Democratic Party, wrote in one Explanation. “Proposition 131 is an overly complicated and overly expensive measure designed by billionaire Kent Thiry without any input from election officials.”

Proponents, however, argue that the main effect of the new system will be to maximize the impact of each vote, regardless of voters’ political affiliation.

“Ultimately, our November ballot measure will give voters a better choice of candidates and a larger voice in our elections,” the Colorado voters firstthe advocacy group that formed around Proposition 131.

On Election Day, Coloradans will decide whether to overhaul the statewide election system or maintain the status quo. The result will influence state elections in the coming years.