The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
Unconvincing.
That was how we described the 2016 referendum push to bring ranked-choice voting to Maine statewide. Voters disagreed with us.
A recipe for confusion and frustration.
That was what we said in 2018 when opposing yet another ranked-choice voting referendum, pointing to the fact that a majority-based ranked-choice voting system could only be implemented in certain elections because of a plurality provision in the Maine Constitution. Still, voters disagreed with us.
Maine has now used ranked-choice voting in some of its elections for several years. There have been bumps along the way in implementing this new (partial) voting system. We certainly don’t think it has delivered on its promise of lessening partisanship. We still find the uneven application of ranked-choice voting — which is used in Maine elections for federal offices and in state office primaries, but not in general elections for governor or the Maine Legislature — to be frustrating and confusing.
That will continue to be the case until the Maine Constitution is amended to change the stipulation that some offices be elected by a plurality, rather than the majority vote involved in ranked-choice voting. Or until ranked-choice voting is repealed entirely.
Twice, we thought the constitutional roadblocks to full implementation were reason enough not to enact ranked-choice voting at all. But twice, Maine voters indicated that they want this voting system. Now, it should be up to them whether ranked-choice voting should be expanded to general elections for governor and the Legislature. That is, after all, what voters thought they were getting with the 2016 referendum (and were incorrectly promised at various stages by referendum backers, let’s not forget).
Democratic state Sen. Cameron Reny has introduced LD 1917, a resolution that proposes to amend the state constitution and apply ranked-choice voting for gubernatorial and state legislative general elections. It needs two-thirds support in both chambers of the Legislature in order to go out to voters as a referendum question.
Aside from the constitutional confusion and partial implementation, the overall ranked-choice doomsday scenarios have not come to fruition. Maine has seen record voter turnout in recent years — not necessarily because of ranked-choice voting, but it certainly isn’t causing voters to stay away from the polls either. Nor is it causing votes to be thrown out, as some RCV opponents have repeatedly and incorrectly claimed. A conservative federal judge has already rejected that flawed argument.
Even as ranked-choice skeptics, we have to say that some of the irresponsible and flat-out wrong arguments made against it over the past few years have grown beyond tedious.
Regardless of the outcome, this statewide vote would provide more insight into how Maine voters feel about ranked-choice voting after experiencing it for themselves. That should be valuable to RCV supporters and opponents alike, if they truly want a voting system that reflects the will of the Maine people.
The status quo, with patchwork implementation of ranked-choice voting for federal offices and state office primaries but not state general elections, makes little sense. If Maine is going to continue to employ ranked-choice voting, it should be across the board. Passing LD 1917 would give Maine voters a chance to make that decision.
