City Club of Portland is proud to present our nonpartisan research report on Oregon Ballot Measure 117, which has been thoroughly reviewed and approved by our members. Based on extensive research and analysis, our report concludes that voters should vote YES on Measure 117.

What is Oregon Ballot Measure 117?

Oregon Ballot Measure 117 proposes implementing Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for federal and state elections. If passed, the measure will take effect in time for the 2028 election cycle.

The measure will apply to the following offices:

  • Federal Elections: President and Vice President, U.S. Senators (2), and U.S. Congressional Representatives (6)
  • State Elections: Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, and Commissioner of Labor and Industry

Additionally, Measure 117 allows cities, counties, metropolitan service districts, school districts, and other local governments to adopt RCV for their elections, unless their home rule charters prohibit it.

Ballot Measure 117 will appear on the ballot this fall after being referred to voters by the Oregon State Legislature. It was introduced as House Bill 2004 (HB 2004) in 2023, following a series of public hearings and discussions about the potential benefits of RCV. The measure builds on local RCV implementations, including those in Portland, Benton County, and the City of Corvallis, which have spurred interest in expanding the system statewide.

What is Ranked Choice Voting?

For over a century, U.S. elections have primarily used a voting system known as “plurality voting,” or “first-past-the-post.” In this system, voters choose their favorite candidate, and the candidate with the most votes wins, even if they don’t receive a majority of the votes. This method is simple but can result in the “spoiler effect,” where similar candidates split the vote, potentially allowing a candidate who is not the top choice to win.

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) offers an alternative to plurality voting. In RCV, voters rank candidates in order of preference. Here’s how it differs from the current system:

  1. Preference Ranking: Voters rank candidates from most to least preferred.
  2. Majority Support: To win, a candidate must receive a majority of the votes. If no candidate gets a majority initially, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed based on voters’ next choices.
  3. Elimination and Redistribution: This process continues until a candidate achieves a majority.

RCV is designed to ensure that elected officials have broader support and reduce the impact of vote splitting.

Types of RCV Systems

There are several types of RCV systems, each with different methods for counting votes and determining winners. The most common types include:

  • Instant-Runoff Voting (IRV): Often used in single-winner elections, this system eliminates candidates with the fewest votes and redistributes their votes until one candidate has a majority.
  • Single Transferable Vote (STV): Used in multi-winner elections, this system also redistributes votes but in a way that helps elect multiple candidates proportionally.

Different jurisdictions may implement RCV in various ways, tailored to their specific needs and election contexts. For example, the RCV being implemented in Portland in 2024 for City Council elections will use a system designed to elect multiple council members per district, which is different from the Instant-Runoff Voting (IRV) proposed by Oregon Measure 117. Measure 117 proposes using IRV for single-winner races in federal and state elections.

Proponent and Opponent Arguments

Proponents’ Arguments

  • Enhancing Voter Choice: RCV allows voters to express their preferences more fully by ranking candidates, leading to more accurate representation.
  • Reducing Negative Campaigning: Candidates are incentivized to appeal to a broader audience, promoting more civil campaigns.
  • Eliminating the Spoiler Effect: RCV prevents vote splitting among similar candidates, reducing the likelihood of a candidate winning without broad support.
  • Promoting Diversity: RCV can help diverse candidates win elections by allowing voters to support them without fear of wasting their vote.

Opponents’ Arguments

  • Voter Confusion: RCV may be more complex than traditional methods, potentially confusing some voters.
  • Increased Administrative Costs: Implementing RCV could lead to higher costs for new equipment, voter education, and longer counting processes.
  • Challenges in Voter Education: Ensuring all voters understand RCV could result in higher rates of ballot errors or undervotes.
  • Potential for Disenfranchisement: The complexity of RCV might disproportionately affect certain voter groups.

Conclusions

Our Ballot Measure Study Committee concluded that Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) under Oregon Measure 117 provides significant improvements over Oregon’s current plurality system. While recognizing that all voting systems have flaws, the committee found that RCV enhances voter representation by allowing a more complete expression of preferences, making it a beneficial reform that more accurately reflects the majority’s sentiments. Despite concerns about RCV potentially favoring certain political parties, the committee found no evidence that it inherently benefits any particular party.

In conclusion, implementing RCV as proposed in Measure 117 is a step toward a more participatory and representative democracy, which could foster greater voter engagement and trust in the electoral process.