RCV Promotes Positive Campaigning, Focused on the Community’s Priorities
PROBLEM: In Sacramento’s current election system, a candidate can alienate half of all voters, ignore major issues, and still get elected.
SOLUTION: RCV motivates candidates to appeal to a broader range of voters, on a broader range of issues, and to avoid negative campaigning.
In RCV elections, a candidate campaigns not only to be your top choice. Even if you’re already supporting their opponent, the candidate still reaches out to you and the candidate is still interested in what you care about – because the candidate hopes to at least be your second choice if they can’t be your top choice.
That’s because those choices matter in an RCV election.
“I door-knocked a number of people who had signs up for my opponent … The conversation didn’t need to stop just because they had already pledged to someone else.” – Rebecca Noecker, Saint Paul City Councilmember (an RCV city)
To win in an RCV election, a candidate must convince their opponents’ supporters to mark them as their second choice. This dynamic encourages candidates to search for common ground, pay attention to all the issues facing the community, and refrain from negative campaigning.
“It was civil and it’s what this city deserves.” – Mark Dion, Mayor of Portland, Maine (elected in an RCV election)
RCV encourages civility, inclusion, and putting the issues above the politics.
THE DATA IS CLEAR: VOTERS PREFER RCV AND RCV ENCOURAGES MORE POSITIVE CAMPAIGNING
Voters in RCV cities are more satisfied with campaigns and see less negative campaigning compared to voters in single-choice systems (like Sacramento’s). Virtually every demographic group studied reported less negativity in RCV cities. (See Socioeconomic and Demographic Perspectives on Ranked Choice Voting in the Bay Area, by Sarah John and Caroline Tolbert, 2015).
Candidates were more likely to engage with each other in RCV cities than in single-choice systems like Sacramento’s. Articles about campaigns in RCV cities had far more positive than negative words. (See Using Campaign Communications to Analyze Civility in Ranked Choice Voting Elections, by Martha Kropf, 2021).
“Now that I’m a sitting supervisor, having run [in an RCV election] has helped me quite a bit because I now have all of these alliances with people in my district who were not part of my natural coalition but now have my ear and vice versa. And I think that’s a good thing for governing.” – Myrna Melgar, San Francisco Supervisor (an RCV city)
Candidates in RCV cities are more likely to reach out to voters in person than those in cities that do not use RCV. Also, voters in RCV cities were more likely to discuss politics with their families, friends, or co-workers. (See Ranked Choice Voting and Participation: Impacts on Deliberative Engagement. Smith, Haley. 2016).
Media coverage in RCV jurisdictions was 85% more positive than negative, which is significantly higher than in single-choice systems (like Sacramento’s). (See Content Analysis of Campaign Tone in Newspapers and Twitter Feeds in 2013 RCV Elections, by FairVote, 2015).
For more information about the positive effects of RCV in cities and counties across the country, go to https://fairvote.org/resources/data-on-rcv/