The Idaho Statesman hosted a debate on ranked-choice voting. Here are the key takeaways

The leader of Idahoans for Open Primaries took the stage Thursday with a national opponent of ranked-choice voting to debate Proposition 1.

The measure would change the way elections are run in Idaho and has been hotly debated in living rooms, courtrooms and online this year. More than 100 people came to the debate, moderated by Idaho Statesman Opinion Editor Scott McIntosh, to learn more about the proposed reform. It followed a Munk Debates style and took place between Luke Mayville of Reclaim Idaho/Idahoans for Open Primaries and Trent England of Save Our States.

Proposition 1 has two components: changes to who can vote in the state’s primary elections and changes to how votes are counted in the general election. Everyone would vote in a primary that includes all candidates regardless of party; The top four would advance, even if more than one belonged to the same party. In the general election, voters rank the four candidates, with their second and third choices becoming important if one of their preferred candidates is eliminated due to insufficient votes.

Here were the key arguments and other takeaways from the exchange on political primaries and ranked choice voting (RCV) at Boise State University.

Because: The measure would enable pre-election participation for more than a quarter of a million voters

“Because we closed the primary, we are blocking 270,000 voters from participating in the state’s most important elections,” Mayville said. “This isn’t just a problem for voters who are blocked. It’s really a problem for all of us because when you discourage so many voters from participating in the process, you end up electing candidates who don’t represent the broader community.”

Against: The problem is not the primaries, but the lack of public participation in the parties

“People want to have their cake and eat it too,” England said. “If you care about who the Republican candidate is, roll up your sleeves, talk to your neighbors and get involved in the Republican Party.” And the same goes for the Democrats. If you’re not willing to do that, don’t sit back and complain that you don’t have a voice.”

Because: The accusation that RCV is too complicated is silly

Mayville said arguments that RCV was too complicated were overblown, calling it “as simple as counting to four.”

“The candidate who comes in last place is eliminated,” he said. “If that was your favorite candidate, your vote will go to your next election. This is it.”

Against: It is complicated, has led to problems, can be “played out”

England said he believes RCV doesn’t pass the “bus station test” because if you go to a bus station and explain ranked choice voting to people and then ask them to explain it to someone else, they could get in trouble.

“I think a lot of people find it very difficult to describe what’s going on in the system,” he said.

“The question is not: ‘Can you manipulate it, can you manipulate it?'” England also said. “The question is: How?”

England pointed out that while the goal of blanket primaries is to reduce the number of candidates to four before the general election, political parties that want to win a seat can win successful primaries — say, if three Republican candidates are in advance in a general election race – to get out and support their party’s candidate who is most likely to win.

This kind of maneuvering has led to a strange situation in an Alaska House race where RCV exists. One Democrat and three Republicans made it into the top four primaries. But then the two Republicans with the fewest primary votes dropped out to support the most popular Republican, sending the fifth- and sixth-place finishers — who together received barely more than 1,000 votes — into the general election. One of those candidates is a convicted felon in New York who has never lived in the state.

For: Idaho already has ‘“eccentric” candidates

Mayville responded that “most people here would agree” that Idaho already has “some eccentric candidates” under its current system. “If a candidate is truly on the fringe and does not represent the values ​​of the broader community, they are very unlikely to win under Proposition 1, whereas under the current process you can win with 9% of voters in a closed primary and then sail.” You generally to victory. You can be the fringe candidate and still win and make the laws we all must live by.”

(In Alaska, the fringe candidate who is a felon is expected to have no chance of winning, but if enough voters chose him as their first choice and did not list another candidate, he could be a “spoiler.”)

Did they agree on anything?

Both debaters said that political parties as they are constituted today are a large part of the problem in American politics. England said they were “weaker and stunted” and that the ballot measure would make political parties less relevant than they are today to “denounce past mistakes once again.”

Mayville agreed that parties have played an important role in the history of American politics. But he countered that they are not currently working well and that Proposal 1 aims to solve a different but related problem.

He said a “common complaint” among Republicans is that the party’s far-right leadership does not represent the views of most Republicans.

“It may be true – and it is probably true – that this reform will not strengthen the parties,” he said. “Those who want to revitalize our political parties will not be able to do so with this particular reform.”

He added that it will not be enough for them to tell independent voters that they can wait and vote in the general election. “Everyone in Idaho understands that the election that really matters in Idaho is the primary,” he said.

The panelists also both discussed that the impact of the reform may not be what some people expect.

England said that even after RCV was passed, Alaska voters “finally had elections that looked a lot like the elections they had before, winners that looked a lot like the winners they had before.”

Mayville said he believes Republicans would still have the strong advantages they have in much of Idaho even if Prop 1 passes.

“There is no evidence to support the idea that this somehow favors one party or the other,” he said, noting that the Alaska state legislature will have the same number of Republicans after the RCV system was implemented in 2022 and voted for Democrats.

(In the 2021–2022 term, there were 22 Democrats, 34 Republicans, and four independent legislators. In the 2023–2024 term, there were 22 Democrats, 32 Republicans, and six independent legislators. One independent legislator resigned and was replaced by a Republican. and increased their balance to 33.)

One change Mayville said the reform would make is to make general elections “competitive for the first time in 30 years.” He said many people believe their vote in November is “meaningless” because the outcome is essentially already predetermined.

“It’s about electing candidates, regardless of party, who truly represent the broader community and are accountable to every citizen, not just the small group of voters who vote in the closed primaries,” he said.