Ranked-choice voting is on the rise in the US; two US states and 45 US cities now use a variant of it.

This November, Missourians have the opportunity to ban it.

Proponents of ranked-choice voting argue that it solves the problems of other voting methods, while critics counter that it makes elections unnecessarily complicated.

Here in the United States, majority voting is the most commonly used system for electing members of government. In this method, the candidate who has the most votes after a single round wins. Proponents of majority voting point out that it is easy to understand and implement.

However, a problem arises when multiple people run for office. In these cases, the vote could be split in multiple ways and the overall winner may not be very popular.

Some places that have experienced such results have opted to adopt an electoral system designed to ensure winners have majority support, such as runoff voting. However, this method can lead to multiple rounds of elections (particularly if it is also used during primaries), which can be costly for governments to organize. Additionally, voters are required to take additional time off from work and other duties, which may reduce turnout.

Hoping to ensure that winners receive a majority while minimizing the disadvantages of runoff voting, some places have adopted ranked-choice voting.

The way this system usually works is that voters rank the candidates in order of preference. A candidate can win outright if he or she receives a majority of the initial votes. If this does not happen, the candidate with the fewest first votes is eliminated, and voters who chose that candidate as their first choice will be included in their next election. If there is still no winner, the candidate with the next fewest votes is also eliminated. This process continues, eliminating candidates one by one until one candidate achieves a majority.

Proponents of ranked-choice voting argue that it costs less time and money compared to runoff voting because all votes are cast on one day in one round.

Because voters can evaluate multiple candidates, another potential advantage of ranked-choice voting is that it can promote moderation among candidates as they vie for voters’ second or later preferences.

Because ranked-choice voting is a different system than most Americans are familiar with, a potential problem is confusion. Some critics falsely claim that ranked-choice voting allows voters to cast more than one ballot per person, but in fact each voter only gets one vote.

However, voters unfamiliar with ranked-choice voting may encounter problems. For example, incorrectly completed ballot papers, such as checking the same preference twice, can be viewed as invalid. Additionally, failing to rank all candidates could result in a ballot being ignored in later rounds of counting.

But teaching people how the system works can reduce such problems.

Missouri’s non-citizen voting ban, already banned, will appear on the statewide ballot

Currently, both Maine and Alaska have adopted versions of ranked-choice voting. In 2020, Maine re-elected Republican Susan Collins to the U.S. Senate. In 2022, Alaska re-elected Republican Lisa Murkowski to the U.S. Senate. Both Collins and Murkowski are often viewed as the most moderate members of Congress.

This is not surprising because to win in ranked-choice voting, candidates must enjoy widespread popularity. For example, a moderate Republican would receive votes from Republicans, but they might also be the second or third choice among some Democrats because those Democrats would likely prefer a moderate Republican to a far-right Republican.

Likewise, a moderate Democrat would receive votes from Democrats, but they could also be the second or third choice among some Republicans because those Republicans would likely prefer a moderate Democrat to a far-left Democrat.

For example, in the 2022 special election for Alaska’s entire congressional district, Alaska residents chose to elect moderate Democrat Mary Peltola over far-right Republican Sarah Palin. Peltola is the first Democrat to serve as Alaska’s representative in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1972. In her two years in office, she has voted against her own party more than almost any other Democrat.

On November 5th, Missourians will have the opportunity to vote on Amendment 7. If passed, this amendment would do two things: (1) it would prohibit non-citizens from voting and (2) it would prohibit the use of ranked-choice voting.

First, it is already illegal for non-citizens to vote here in Missouri.

Second, when deciding whether Missouri should ban ranked choice voting, one should first consider who would benefit from this change.

Recall that in ranked-choice voting, it is easier for moderates to win, while it is harder for extreme politicians to win. Whether this is good or bad depends on whether you consider yourself a moderate Democrat/Republican or an extreme Democrat/Republican.

For far-left Democrats or far-right Republicans, it’s probably in your best interest to vote “yes” on Amendment 7 because Missouri would maintain majority voting, which favors the kind of politicians you support.

For moderate Democrats or moderate Republicans, it is probably in your best interest to vote “no” on Amendment 7. That doesn’t mean Missouri will adopt ranked-choice voting. However, it would leave the door open for Missourians to adopt it one day if we so choose, at which point moderate politicians would have a better chance of winning.

Americans often think that the best way to influence change is to win the game by ensuring that their preferred politician wins the election.

However, politicians come and go, and an often-overlooked way to influence the game is to change the rules of the game itself.

Do you like the current rules? Or would you like to change them at some point? Amendment 7 gives you a choice.