Democrats Want to Nationalize Ranked Choice Voting
For a party that worships democracy, Democrats sure do want to undermine it
Radical leftist Democrats in Congress are pushing a bill to require every congressional primary and general election use ranked choice voting (RCV).
On Dec. 10, Reps. Jamie Raskin (MD-08) and Don Beyer (VA-08), and Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT) introduced legislation to take ranked choice voting (RCV)—until now an unpopular niche voting method—nationwide. This would make it cheaper and easier for liberal megadonors to elect radical leftists, and thereby control the political process to ensure America First candidates do not upset the liberal Washington consensus.
Democrats publicly worship at the altar of "democracy" and accuse Republicans of wanting to destroy it. However, it is Democrats, not Republicans, who consistently try to undermine the democratic system America’s Founders created—whether they’re attacking the Electoral College or trying to prevent voters from electing their preferred candidate.
RCV does the latter.
Destroying the One Man, One Vote Concept
Rather than allow voters to elect whomever they want by plurality or even through a run-off, they want voters to rank the candidates. If no candidate wins outright on the first count, they add the second-choice votes, and so forth until a candidate wins.
Don Beyer, the Virginia democrat, released the following statement:
Polarization in Congress is worse than ever, and this is making it harder and harder for Congress to solve basic problems for the American people. Ranked choice voting would help fix our broken political system by changing election incentives to favor leaders who build broad and diverse coalitions focused on solutions rather than divisive rhetoric. This reform would strengthen our democracy and make Congress more responsive to the needs of the people we represent.
But Congress has always been polarized. In fact, it’s supposed to be—that’s how democracy works.
“Our democracy is at its strongest when everyone is heard and represented,” said Welch.
Yet when America First voters are heard and represented, their representatives are somehow undermining democracy by voting the will of their constituents.
People like Beyer and Welch don’t actually want democracy. They prefer a technocracy controlled by elites within a narrowly acceptable viewpoint with a democratic façade.
Interestingly, for a voting method that allegedly reduces polarization, some of the most polarizing Democrats are cosponsoring this legislation, including Reps. Angie Craig (MN-02), Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Ilhan Omar (MN-05), Eric Swalwell (CA-14), and Ayanna Pressley (MA-07). Additionally, of the 74 bills in favor of RCV introduced in 2023, only eight percent saw bipartisan support, and where it has been implemented, unpopular Democrats have managed to defeat more popular Republicans, showing a clear Democrat partisan bias in both the movement’s support and outcome.
(RELATED: MICHIGAN: Ranked Choice Voting Hordes Want to Make This State Their Next Victim)
The Anti-Democratic Effects of Ranked Choice Voting
RCV fundamentally undermines America’s democratic system by introducing unnecessary complexity that confuses voters and erodes public trust in electoral outcomes. Requiring voters to rank multiple candidates rather than simply selecting one leads to widespread ballot exhaustion—where ballots are discarded after the first count if not fully ranked—resulting in thousands of votes getting thrown out. This happened in Maine's 2018 election and Alaska's 2022 race. This disproportionately harms seniors and working-class voters who may lack the time or resources to learn and navigate an entirely foreign voting system.
The RCV system’s reliance on expensive, lengthy eliminations further complicates audits and recounts, delaying results and fostering distrust. This was evidenced by a California RCV election where software errors crowned the wrong winner, necessitating months of litigation to correct it.
This is no accidental erosion of democracy, but rather a deliberate tool wielded by liberal mega donors and dark money networks to manipulate outcomes in favor of their ideological allies. Pro-RCV organizations like FairVote, Article IV and Democracy Fund are bankrolled by billionaire "philanthropists" including Pierre Omidyar, former Enron trader John Arnold, and Kathryn Murdoch, who often outspend supporters or traditional democracy 100-to-1.
These funders promote RCV to fracture conservative primaries and funnel votes leftward toward "centrist" or Democrat candidates, as in Alaska where a Democrat won despite Republicans garnering more first-choice votes statewide. Even the Communist Party USA endorses RCV as a "struggle for democracy" to boost leftist viability by redirecting fringe votes against Republicans.
RCV has proven extremely unpopular with the public when put to a popular vote, even when opponents were outspent 10–1. In blue Colorado, voters rejected RCV 55–45 despite pro-RCV mega donors dropping nearly $20 million on the initiative.
Ultimately, RCV's donor-driven crusade is a ploy by uber wealthy liberals to dilute the electorate's voice, ensuring outcomes align with educated liberal elites rather than the public. This is what election-less technocracy would produce, and the form of government the Raskins and Beyers of the world would prefer to the unpredictability of letting the uncultured masses elect disruptive populists.
Republicans in Congress must stand united and oppose this dangerous bill. RCV does everything Democrats accuse Republicans of doing in that it attacks democracy and attempts to cement a form of oligarchy. Parties would still exist; election would still be held, but candidates with high name recognition—whether from incumbency or from wall-to-wall favorable coverage by the mainstream media—would enjoy a massive advantage over dedicated conservatives with motivated supporters who would normally win in a traditional run-off system.
(READ MORE: Voters Roundly Reject Ranked-Choice Voting Despite Millions from Megadonors)
