Ranked-Choice Voting

threatens our elections.

It's more complicated, more partisan, and less transparent. Ranked-choice voting is wrong for our elections. Sign the petition if you agree!


Now is not the time for risky experiments with elections. RCV proponents claim it "guarantees a majority"—but it does that only by throwing away some ballots! RCV is a slower, less transparent process that relies on computers to "adjust" election results.

RCV is complicated for voters and election workers.

RCV encourages fringe candidates and radical splinter parties

RCV is slow and relies on technology that many voters don't trust


States can act to stop RCV. The Legislature and governor must enact a law prohibiting RCV in state and local elections. In states without such a law, officials should oppose any attempt to adopt RCV at the state or local level.

Read why "Ranked Choice Voting is a Bad Choice."


RCV is a complex process where voters can rank multiple candidates. If one candidate receives a majority of first-place votes, it works like any other election (the rankings are irrelevant). If not, a computer adjusts the results so that the candidate with the least first-place votes is eliminated, and first-place votes for that candidate are disregarded in favor of whoever is second-place on those ballots. Any of those ballots that do not rank a second-place candidate are thrown out. The remaining ballots are re-tabulated to see if a candidate now has a majority of adjusted first-place votes. 

This process is done over and over until the computer determines that a candidate has a majority of the remaining, adjusted first-place votes. Many ballots may be thrown out, since not all voters will be willing to rank all the candidates. Thus when RCV claims to create a “majority winner,” it does that by adjusting and discarding ballots. It allows a candidate who lost in the first round to win after multiple rounds of adjusted vote counting. 

Not only does this process take time, it cannot even begin until every single ballot is received and processed. In other words, vote counting starts later and takes longer. In a large election, only a computer can run the complex adjustments, making RCV dependent on technology and hand-recounts and audits much harder. 


Out-of-state special interests convinced Maine and Alaska voters to adopt RCV statewide, and many cities, including San Francisco and New York, now use RCV. Those same special interests are pushing RCV across the country, especially in cities and towns. Every state and local government is at risk. 


We believe in the traditional American democratic process, and we want transparent elections that can be verified by hand recounts and audits. That’s not too much to ask when it comes to the foundation of our system of government. We invite you to connect with us on social media for updates and more information. 

Read Tennessee's law against RCV

© Stop RCV 2022


See model legislation