Remodeling Democracy

When most people think of elections, they automatically think of major elections that occur the first Tuesday of November in even-numbered years. However, elections take place throughout the year, and some states conduct their statewide elections in odd-numbered years.

While smaller elections lead to shortened ballots, it costs states precious resources and everyday voters time. Additionally, we’ve seen a significant difference in voter turnout in local or state elections that take place outside of major election dates, leading to less participation and a less representative democracy. Responsive Gov’s goal is to see where it is feasible to consolidate local elections to major election years.

America is one of few countries to use single-member winner-take-all districts. Under a winner-take-all system, whichever candidate receives the most votes wins the district. Voters who cast votes for other candidates have no representation. By contrast, with proportional representation, multiple districts are combined into larger multi-member districts and representatives are chosen in proportion to a party’s vote share. In a ten-member district with proportional representation where Democrats win 60% of the vote, they will win six of the ten legislative seats. If Republicans win 30% of the vote, they will win three seats. And a third party with 10% of the vote would win one seat.

Responsive Gov believes proportional representation can offer a simple
approach that accurately reflects voter support for political parties, while also increasing turnout and eliminating gerrymandering in ways that other forms of remodeling democracy cannot. Proportional representation has the potential to make government more accountable to its constituents, give voters more choices within and across political parties, and reduce the risk of political instability that comes with our current systems.

In recent years, Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) has been pitched as a panacea, the fix for all that ails American elections. At Responsive Gov, we think that structural reforms must be closely tailored to a problem in a particular state that the reform is trying to solve. In particular, reforms like RCV that change the outcome of who wins elections and require voters to use a new and unfamiliar system must be deployed carefully in the particular political and implementation environment of each state.

Check out our research below on why RCV should not be seen as a one-size-fits-all solution:

• RCV: Avoiding a One-Size-Fits-All Approach
• RCV and Vote Dilution