Ranked choice voting could decide which party controls the US House. How does it work?

posted in: Society | 0

By MAYA SWEEDLER and DAVID SHARP

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — An uncommon system of voting could be central to which party controls the U.S. House this fall — or even the presidency.

In Maine and Alaska, voters in competitive congressional districts will elect a winner using ranked choice voting.

Rather than cast a single vote for their preferred candidate, voters rank their choices in order of preference on the ballot. If a candidate is the first choice of more than 50% of voters in the first round of counting, that candidate is the winner.

But if no candidate surpasses 50%, the count continues in round two. The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who chose that candidate as their top pick have their votes redistributed to their next choice. This continues with the candidate with the fewest votes getting eliminated until someone emerges with a majority of votes.

Ranked choice voting has become more popular in recent years, particularly at the municipal level.

Voters in two dozen cities and counties — from New York and Minneapolis to Boulder, Colorado — used ranked choice voting in 2023, according to FairVote, a nonpartisan organization that advocates for the expansion of ranked choice voting. Seven other cities voted in favor of preserving, adopting or expanding ranked choice voting.

Proponents of ranked choice voting argue the system encourages candidates to build broader coalitions, eliminates the spoiler effect and discourages negative campaigning. Opponents say it’s confusing and can result in a candidate without the largest number of first-choice votes ultimately prevailing.

Because they take place over multiple rounds that are tabulated only once all first-choice votes are counted, elections in Alaska and Maine that advance to ranked choice are often resolved a week or more after Election Day.

Maine

FILE – A clerk hands a ballot to a voter on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2022, in Lewiston, Maine. Maine uses a ranked-choice voting system for some of its election races. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty, File)

Maine adopted ranked voting in elections in 2016 in a statewide referendum. It is used in all statewide primaries with more than two candidates. In general elections, it is used for federal offices including the presidency but not in state races, such as for governor or the Legislature, because it runs afoul of the Maine Constitution.

It quickly came into play — twice — in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District. Then-GOP Rep. Bruce Poliquin won the most first choice votes in 2018, but lost to Democratic Rep. Jared Golden when votes were reallocated after removing the third- and fourth-place finishers. The process repeated four years later when Golden beat Poliquin in a rematch.

A federal judge twice upheld the constitutionality of ranked voting in separate challenges by Poliquin in 2018 and a group of voters in 2020.

This year, only two candidates are explicitly on the ballot in the 2nd District — Golden and Republican Austin Theriault — but the race could nonetheless go to ranked choice voting because votes will be counted for a third candidate whose write-in candidacy has been recognized by the state.

If no first-round winner receives a majority of the vote on Election Day, then the ballots are shipped to the state capital, where the ballots are entered into a computer. The process takes about a week before the final tally is run and the winner declared.

Alaska

Alaskans approved the use of ranked choice voting in a 2020 statewide initiative. It is used in all general elections, including for the presidency, but not in state primaries. Alaska’s state primaries are open, so all candidates, regardless of party, run on the same ballot and the top four vote-getters advance to the general election.

Related Articles

National Politics |


Election conspiracy theories fueled a push to hand-count votes, but doing so is risky and slow

National Politics |


Not all elections look the same. Here are some of the different ways states run their voting

National Politics |


Don’t count on a recount to change the winner in close elections this fall. They rarely do

National Politics |


Yes, voter fraud happens. But it’s rare and election offices have safeguards to catch it

National Politics |


Trump-Putin ties are back in the spotlight after new book describes calls

Presidential primaries are different. Candidates can make the ballot by winning a recognized party’s primary or successfully petitioning the state Division of Elections. This year, there will be eight presidential tickets on the ballot in Alaska; voters can rank all of them if they choose.

The first use of ranked choice voting — and when it first came into play — was in a 2022 special election for the state’s at-large congressional district. Now-Rep. Mary Peltola, a Democrat, received the most votes in the first round of voting, while two Republican candidates finished second and third. She surpassed 50% of the vote when the third-place candidate was eliminated.

Peltola went on to win the regularly scheduled election, which also used ranked choice voting, later that year. She faces Republican Nick Begich, one of the two candidates she defeated in 2022, and two others in November.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski was reelected in 2022 in a race that went to ranked choice voting.

Alaska will vote next month on a ballot measure that would repeal the state’s new open primary and ranked choice general election system.

The presidency

The more candidates in a race, the more likely it is that candidates will split the vote and nobody will win a majority, advancing the election to ranked choice voting. The presidential ballots in Maine and Alaska will include more than just Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump, so it’s possible those states’ races could wind up going to ranked choice voting.

Maine is one of two states that gives an electoral vote to the winner of each congressional district along with two to the statewide winner, and ranked choice voting could go into effect if no presidential candidate receives a majority in one of the districts.

In 2020, before Alaska’s ranked choice voting was in place, Trump received about 53% of the state’s vote. Democrat Joe Biden won Maine with about 53% of the vote that year.

Sweedler reported from Washington.

Read more about how U.S. elections work at Explaining Election 2024, a series from The Associated Press aimed at helping make sense of the American democracy. The AP receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Not all elections look the same. Here are some of the different ways states run their voting

posted in: News | 0

By MAYA SWEEDLER

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. general election on Nov. 5 will decide the country’s direction, but it is far from a nationally administered contest. The 50 states and the District of Columbia run their own elections, and each does things a little differently.

Here’s a look at some notable variations in the 2024 election:

Maine and Nebraska allocate electoral votes by congressional district

To win the presidency outright, a candidate must receive at least 270 of the 538 votes in the Electoral College. In 48 states, the statewide winner gets all of that state’s electoral votes, and that’s also the case in the nation’s capital.

In Maine and Nebraska, the candidate who receives the most votes in each congressional district wins one electoral vote from that district. The candidate who wins the statewide vote receives another two.

In 2020, Democrat Joe Biden received three of Maine’s four electoral votes because he won the popular vote in the state and its 1st Congressional District. Republican Donald Trump received one electoral vote from the 2nd Congressional District. Trump won four of Nebraska’s five votes for winning the popular vote in the state as well as its 1st and 3rd Congressional Districts; Biden received one electoral vote for winning the 2nd Congressional District.

Alaska and Maine use ranked choice voting

In ranked choice voting, voters rank candidates for an office in order of preference on the ballot. If no candidate is the first choice for more than 50% of voters, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who chose that candidate as their top pick have their votes redistributed to their next choice. This continues, with the candidate with the fewest votes getting eliminated, until someone emerges with a majority of votes.

Related Articles

National Politics |


Election conspiracy theories fueled a push to hand-count votes, but doing so is risky and slow

National Politics |


Ranked choice voting could decide which party controls the US House. How does it work?

National Politics |


Don’t count on a recount to change the winner in close elections this fall. They rarely do

National Politics |


Yes, voter fraud happens. But it’s rare and election offices have safeguards to catch it

National Politics |


Trump-Putin ties are back in the spotlight after new book describes calls

Maine uses ranked choice voting in state-level primaries and for federal offices in the general election. That means Maine voters can rank presidential, Senate and House candidates on ballots that include the Democrat and the Republican who advanced out of their respective party primaries, plus third-party and independent candidates who qualify.

The presidential ballot will include Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris, plus three other candidates. In the six years since implementing ranked choice voting, the state has used it twice in races for Congress in its 2nd Congressional District. The 2020 presidential race did not advance to ranked choice voting, with the winners of the state and in each congressional district exceeding 52% of the vote.

Alaska holds open primaries for statewide offices and sends the top four vote-getters, regardless of party, to the general election, where the winner is decided using ranked choice voting. In all legislative and statewide executive offices, Alaskans can rank up to four names that can include multiple candidates from the same party.

The exception is the presidency, which is eligible for ranked choice voting in Alaska for the first time. This year, there will be eight presidential tickets on the ballot, and Alaskans can rank all candidates if they choose to. The last time the winner of the presidential contest in Alaska failed to surpass 50% of the vote was in 1992, when third-party candidate Ross Perot won almost 20% of the national popular vote.

But in 2022, both Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola and Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski won their elections after both went to ranked choice voting.

Another wrinkle this year? In Alaska, where ranked choice voting was implemented by ballot measure in 2020, there’s a voter initiative on the ballot this fall to repeal it.

In California and Washington, candidates from the same party can face off

California and Washington hold open primaries in which all candidates run on the same ballot and the two top vote-getters advance to the general election, regardless of party. This year, there are two House races in Washington that include candidates of the same party, one with two Republicans and one with two Democrats. There are four in California: three with only Democrats and one with only Republicans.

The winning party in those six districts will be reflected in The Associated Press’ online graphic showing the balance of power in the House at poll close, rather than once a winner is declared because the party of the winner is a foregone conclusion.

Louisiana holds a ‘primary’ on Nov. 5

Louisiana holds what it refers to as its “open primaries” on the same day the rest of the country holds its general election. In Louisiana, all candidates run on the same open primary ballot. Any candidate who earns more than 50% of the vote in the primary wins the seat outright.

If no candidate exceeds 50% of the vote, the top two vote-getters advance to a head-to-head runoff, which can end up pitting two Republicans or two Democrats against each other. Louisiana refers to these contests as its “general election.”

That will change for elections for the U.S. House starting in 2026 when congressional races will have earlier primaries that are open only to registered members of a party. Certain state races will continue to hold open primaries in November, but the change will prevent future members of Congress from waiting until December — a month later than the rest of the country — to know whether they are headed to Washington.

Nebraska has two competing abortion measures on the ballot, but only one can be enacted

In Nebraska, any measure that receives approximately 123,000 valid signatures qualifies for the ballot. This year, two measures relating to abortion met this threshold.

One would enshrine in the Nebraska Constitution the right to have an abortion until fetal viability or later, to protect the health of the pregnant woman. The other would write into the constitution the current 12-week ban, with exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the pregnant woman.

This marks the first time since the 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade that a state has measures that seek to roll back abortion rights and protect abortion rights on the ballot at the same time.

It’s possible voters could end up approving both measures. But because they’re competing and therefore cannot both be enshrined in the constitution, the measure with the most “for” votes will be the one adopted, according to the Nebraska secretary of state.

Georgia holds runoff elections if a candidate doesn’t win a majority of votes

In primary elections, a handful of states, mostly in the South, go to runoffs if no candidate receives at least 50% of the vote. In races with more than two candidates, runoffs in those states are common. Several states held primary runoffs this year.

Georgia uses the same rules in general elections. The last three Senate races there went to runoffs because a third-party candidate won enough of the vote to prevent the Republican or Democratic nominee from exceeding 50% of the vote.

But this year, runoff possibilities may be confined to downballot races such as state legislature. There’s no Senate race there this year, and the U.S. House races have only two candidates on the ballot.

Texas, Florida and Michigan report a lot of votes before final polls are closed

This is common in states that span multiple time zones. In most states, polls close at the same time in each time zone.

The AP will not call the winner of a race before all the polls in a jurisdiction are scheduled to close, even if votes already reported before that time make clear who will win the race. So if there is a statewide race in a state where polls close at 8 p.m. local time, but some of the state is in the Eastern time zone and some of the state is in Central time zone, the earliest the AP can call the winner is 8 p.m. CST/9 p.m. EST.

The AP will still show the results as they arrive from counties with closed polls.

Some of the biggest states with split poll close times are Florida, Michigan, Texas and Oregon. Tennessee is an exception, as even though the state is in both the Eastern and the Central time zones, all counties coordinate their voting to conclude at the same time.

Read more about how U.S. elections work at Explaining Election 2024, a series from The Associated Press aimed at helping make sense of the American democracy. The AP receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Don’t count on a recount to change the winner in close elections this fall. They rarely do

posted in: News | 0

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER

WASHINGTON (AP) — With the American electorate so evenly divided, there will be elections in November close enough that officials will have to recount the votes. Just don’t expect those recounts to change the winner. They rarely do, even when the margins are tiny.

“The (original) count is pretty accurate because the machines work — they work very well,” said Tammy Patrick, a former election official in Arizona who is now with the National Association of Election Officials. “We have recounts and we have audits to make sure we got it right.”

There have been 36 recounts in statewide general elections since America’s most famous recount in 2000. That year, Republican George W. Bush maintained his lead over Democrat Al Gore in Florida — and won the presidency — after a recount was stopped by the Supreme Court.

Since then, only three of those statewide recounts resulted in a new winner, and all three were decided by hundreds of votes, not thousands. That’s according to an Associated Press review of statewide recounts using data from the AP vote count, state election offices and research by Fair Vote, a nonpartisan organization that researches elections and advocates for changes in the way elections are conducted.

Most states allow recounts when the margin between the top candidates falls within a specific margin, such as 0.5 percentage points, even when that means the number of votes separating them is actually in the thousands or even tens of thousands. But there is no precedent for a recount changing the winner in a race with margins that big, at least not since Congress made sweeping changes to U.S. election law in 2002.

The most recent statewide race overturned by a recount was in 2008 in Minnesota. Republican Sen. Norm Coleman led Democrat Al Franken by 215 votes in the initial count, out of more than 2.9 million ballots cast. After a hand recount, Franken won by 225 votes, a shift of 0.02 percentage points, or two one-hundredths of a percentage point.

Among the 36 statewide recounts since 2000, the average change in the winning margin, whether it grew or shrank, was 0.03 percentage points. The biggest shift was 0.11 percentage points in a relatively low turnout race for Vermont auditor in 2006. In that race, incumbent Republican Randy Brock led Democrat Thomas Salmon by 137 votes after the initial count. A recount flipped the race and Salmon won by 102 votes.

Recounts aren’t limited to general elections. They happen in primaries, too.

Earlier this year, the Washington state primary for commissioner of public lands went to a recount after the initial tally had Democrat Dave Upthegrove leading Republican Sue Kuehl Pederson by 51 votes, out of more than 1.9 million votes counted, as they vied for second place.

After the recount, Upthegrove’s lead shrank by just two votes. In Washington’s primary system, the top two candidates advance to the general election, regardless of their political party.

There are even more recounts in downballot races that are sometimes decided by a handful of votes. But even in these lower turnout elections, recounts rarely change the winners.

“Recounts are shifting a very small number of votes,” said Deb Otis, director of research and policy at Fair Vote. “We’re going to see recounts in 2024 that are not going to change the outcome.”

Related Articles

National Politics |


Election conspiracy theories fueled a push to hand-count votes, but doing so is risky and slow

National Politics |


Ranked choice voting could decide which party controls the US House. How does it work?

National Politics |


Not all elections look the same. Here are some of the different ways states run their voting

National Politics |


Yes, voter fraud happens. But it’s rare and election offices have safeguards to catch it

National Politics |


Trump-Putin ties are back in the spotlight after new book describes calls

States have a wide variety of laws on when and how recounts are conducted. Many states have automatic recounts if the margin between the top two candidates is within a certain margin. The most common margin is 0.5 percentage points, but there is a lot of variation. Some states allow candidates to request recounts but require that they pay for them — unless the winner changes.

Alaska, Montana, South Dakota and Texas mandate recounts only if there is an exact tie, though candidates in those states can request a recount. South Carolina has automatic recounts if the margin between the top two candidates is 1% or less of the total votes cast in the race.

The AP may declare a winner in a race that is eligible for a recount if the AP determines the lead is too large for a recount or legal challenge to change the outcome.

In Washington’s public lands primary, which was ultimately decided by 49 votes, the AP waited until after the recount to declare the winner because the margin was so close. But in cases where the number of votes separating the top candidates is larger, for example in a statewide race where the candidates are separated by thousands or tens of thousands of votes, the AP may determine that it’s not possible for a recount to reverse the outcome.

Statewide recounts almost always change the results by a few votes.

Patrick said that’s usually because of human error -– either by an election worker or by voters. For example, paper ballots are often rejected because voters didn’t fill them out correctly, but they might later get added to the count after a review.

Paper ballots usually require voters to fill in little bubbles next to their chosen candidate, just like students taking standardized tests. Tabulation machines count the votes by looking for a mark on a very specific area of the ballot, Patrick said. If voters indicate their preference in some other way, like circling their chosen candidate, the machines won’t count the vote.

In some states, bipartisan panels review rejected ballots to see if they can determine the intent of the voter. Some states do these reviews whether there is a recount or not. Other states only do them if there is a recount. Still others never do these reviews and the ballots are simply rejected.

Patrick said she’s seen ballots marked many different ways that weren’t picked up by the tabulation machines, like voters using crayons or marking their choices with a highlighter.

In the Minnesota recount, a voter filed in the dot for Franken but also wrote “Lizard People” in the box for write-in votes. The ballot was rejected.

“Voters do a lot of very interesting things with their ballots,” Patrick said.

Stephen Ohlemacher is AP’s Election Decision Editor.

Read more about how U.S. elections work at Explaining Election 2024, a series from The Associated Press aimed at helping make sense of the American democracy. The AP receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Allison Schrager: Algorithms don’t raise rents, landlords do

posted in: Society | 0

A friend on dating apps recently told me she is often presented with men who are lying about their age — or rather, as they tell it, being forced to lie. The culprit, they are eager to explain, is the algorithm. “I am actually 57,” reads one profile she showed me, “but lowered my age because of the algos, LOL.”

What’s disturbing about her story is not that so many men are pretending to be younger than they are (what else is new?), but that they don’t seem to know what an algorithm is. Their problem is not a sinister program preventing them from finding a younger woman. It is that many women set an age range they don’t fall into. The algorithms are just doing their job, which is optimizing to find a solution for a given set of data.

Yet algorithms have become the villain of this technological era — blamed for depriving us of love, manipulating us on social media and increasing our rent. Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has issued a plan to address that last problem, proposing to crack down on real estate companies that use “algorithmic price fixing” software to raise rents.

Algorithms are used throughout the economy to set prices and manage supply. Lowering the cost of housing is a major objective of the Harris campaign, so it not surprising that it is focusing on their use in real estate. It is far from clear, however, that algorithms are to blame for rising rents.

About one-third of rental units are priced using rent-setting software that is powered by algorithms that make use of lots of data from the local and comparable markets. The alternative — that is, landlords setting rents by looking at listings of comparable units and talking to brokers — is less precise.

The concern is that, if everyone uses pricing algorithms, landlords can collude and set above-market prices. Rising rents would seem to confirm the presence of collusion. As algorithms have become more common, rents have gone up. In 2011, according to the property management company RealPage, about 15% of rental units were priced using software; by 2021 this figure was 30%. At the same time, the US population grew in this decade, as did the desire to live in popular areas, and supply of housing lagged demand. This is a far more plausible explanation for the increase in rents.

Related Articles

Opinion |


Lisa Jarvis: Nobel Prize for medicine recognizes microRNA — and curiosity

Opinion |


Mark Z. Barabak: She’s going to prison for Trump’s Big Lie

Opinion |


Thomas Friedman: What I’m thinking about on the first anniversary of the war

Opinion |


Adrian Wooldridge: Nanny states are now essential to economic health

Opinion |


Clive Crook: Trump offers voters a trifecta of economic madness

According to a study from two professors at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, management companies that use pricing software tend to be more responsive to market conditions: They raise rents more when the market booms, but also cut rents more and (and have fewer vacancies) when it falls. This suggests they are not colluding so much as maximizing profits.

At the same time, the study shows that landlords who use pricing software affect the behavior of landlords who don’t. In markets where more landlords use pricing algorithms, occupancy rates were lower and rents were 3% higher.

Harris supports a bill that would prohibit landlords from using the services of any company that coordinates pricing and supply information. It defines coordination as collecting data from multiple landlords, calculating a price based on that data with a “process that uses computation,” and recommending those lease terms. This would all be illegal if the lease terms were in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. But it is easy to foresee a situation where a landlord has to worry about being sued by his tenants anytime he uses data and a computer program to decide what rent to charge.

What the bill calls “consciously parallel pricing coordination,” most economists would call “using technology to set prices more efficiently.” The bill effectively bars landlords from using the best tools and available data to discover the right price for their units. This would indeed make landlords less profitable. But it would also make them less inclined to build more, or to lower rents when times are hard.

Besides, the main reason why rents increased was not collusion — it was a market short on supply, and that raises prices and leaves buyers with less market power. The way to restore power to tenants is not to outlaw the use of data. It is to encourage more building so consumers have more choice.

Algorithms do reflect market conditions. As housing markets across the US faced shortages in recent years, they contributed to prices rising even faster than they would have. But algorithms are not the root cause of the problem.

Of course algorithms can be used for nefarious purposes, in real estate or any market, and when people use them to collude or manipulate prices, they should be prosecuted. But it is not clear this has happened in real estate. Algorithms are often vilified, but they are a valuable innovation that can help markets become more efficient and offer more choice.

In either the housing market or the dating market, algorithms are not to blame. All they do is bring forth the underlying data that reflects a mismatch between demand and supply — whether the product is reasonably priced apartments or honest bachelors.

Allison Schrager is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering economics. A senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, she is author of “An Economist Walks Into a Brothel: And Other Unexpected Places to Understand Risk.”