Fact Check: "No evidence supports RCV's promised transformative political effects."
What We Know
Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) is an electoral system where voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed until a candidate achieves a majority. Advocates claim that RCV can lead to more moderate candidates being elected and reduce political polarization (Center for Effective Government).
However, empirical research on RCV's effects in the United States has shown only small impacts in cities that previously used runoff systems (Center for Effective Government). Studies from other countries, such as Italy and Brazil, suggest that runoff systems can encourage more candidates to run and produce moderate platforms compared to plurality systems, but the direct applicability of these findings to U.S. legislative elections remains uncertain (Center for Effective Government).
Additionally, survey research indicates that U.S. voters are generally more comfortable with plurality and runoff elections than with RCV, raising questions about the public's acceptance of this reform (Center for Effective Government).
Analysis
The claim that "no evidence supports RCV's promised transformative political effects" is partially true. While there is some evidence suggesting that RCV could lead to more moderate candidates and reduce polarization, the empirical support for these claims is limited and mixed. The research primarily focuses on cities that have adopted RCV and shows only small effects when compared to traditional runoff systems (Center for Effective Government).
Moreover, the theoretical benefits of RCV are contingent upon various assumptions about voter behavior and candidate strategies, which may not hold true in all contexts (Center for Effective Government). The studies conducted in Italy and Brazil provide some insights into the potential benefits of RCV, but their applicability to the U.S. context is not guaranteed (Center for Effective Government).
The reliability of the sources cited is generally high, as they come from reputable academic institutions and researchers with expertise in political science and economics. However, the limited empirical research comparing RCV to plurality systems in the U.S. suggests that more comprehensive studies are needed to fully understand the transformative potential of RCV.
Conclusion
The verdict is Partially True. While there is some evidence supporting the potential benefits of RCV, such as promoting moderate candidates and reducing polarization, the empirical data is limited and does not conclusively demonstrate that RCV will have transformative political effects. The effectiveness of RCV may vary significantly depending on the specific electoral context and voter behavior, which complicates the assessment of its overall impact.
