The D.C. Democratic Party recently filed a lawsuit to block a ballot initiative that aims to enhance elections in the District. This initiative would grant independent voters access to city primaries and implement a ranked-choice voting system. However, the party’s actions hinder the ability of D.C. residents to have a say in the administration of elections, ultimately perpetuating a less representative local government.
Nevertheless, the lawsuit lacks merit. The D.C. Board of Elections confirmed on July 21 that the initiative, known as the Make All Votes Count Act, is an appropriate subject for a ballot referendum and would be legal if passed. Even D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb (D) agreed with this decision. Despite this, the Democratic organization filed a lawsuit reiterating claims that the attorney general had already refuted. The lawsuit begins by suggesting that Marion Barry might not have won the 1978 Democratic mayoral primary if ranked-choice voting had been in place, which demonstrates a misunderstanding of how the system actually works and fails to provide a valid legal argument.
The lawsuit argues that opening primaries to independents would infringe on the First and Fifth Amendment rights of Democratic Party members to associate with individuals of their choosing, suggesting that they do not want the more than 86,000 unaffiliated D.C. voters (out of approximately 527,000 total voters) to have a say in their primaries. However, several states like Arizona, Colorado, Massachusetts, and West Virginia already have semi-open primaries. In fact, D.C.’s current system is more closed compared to many other states.
From a moral standpoint, the Democratic Party finds itself on the wrong side of the debate. Since D.C. is predominantly Democratic, the winner of the general election in November is typically determined by the June primary. This means that independent voters are effectively disenfranchised and cannot participate in choosing their mayor and other officials. It is particularly important to allow independents to vote in party primaries in Washington.
Moreover, the city’s primaries, which determine who runs for office, often experience low voter turnout, and winners frequently secure victory with less than 50% of the vote. Implementing ranked-choice voting would ensure that winners have broad support. In this system, if no candidate receives a majority of the initial count, the candidate with the lowest number of votes gets eliminated, and the second choices of their supporters are considered. This process continues until a candidate receives over 50% of the votes. This approach has proven effective in various elections, such as the 2021 New York mayoral race and congressional contests in Alaska last year.
The Democratic Party’s lawsuit raises concerns that ranked-choice voting could suppress the voice and influence of voters of color for years to come, citing voter confusion as a potential issue. However, we have confidence in Washington’s voters from all communities. Parents already rank their preferences in the city’s school placement lottery, while the D.C. Housing Authority employs ranked preferences for public housing assignments.
Research conducted by FairVote, an organization advocating for ranked-choice voting, suggests that the system tends to benefit candidates and voters of color. Winning Black and Hispanic candidates consistently increased their vote totals between the initial and final ballot counts at a higher rate compared to winning White candidates. Voters of color also tend to rank more candidates than White voters, ensuring that their preferences remain relevant throughout multiple rounds of counting. This method of ranking candidates also mitigates the risk of Black candidates splitting community support.
Ranked-choice voting has been successfully implemented in Takoma Park, Md., since 2007, and Arlington recently experimented with it during a primary for the county board of supervisors. The ballot was easily understandable, and the election proceeded smoothly. The county race revolved around a debate over a housing density proposal. After the first round of counting, the two leading candidates both opposed more density. However, after implementing ranked-choice tabulation, one of the winners supported the plan, while the other opposed it. This outcome better represented the community’s sentiments compared to what voters would have faced under the traditional first-past-the-post system.
Despite complaints from a minority of individuals, Arlington should continue to explore ranked-choice voting as an option. Additionally, this system should already be the standard in D.C. Unfortunately, a few incumbent council members obstructed a ranked-choice voting proposal by council member Christina Henderson (I-At Large). Although the majority of members co-sponsored the bill, it never received a proper vote. Hence, a ballot initiative bypassing the D.C. Council became necessary.
A hearing regarding the Democratic lawsuit against the ballot initiative is scheduled for November 3, and it should be swiftly dismissed.
Note: HTML tags have not been commented on in this response.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
