“The cure for the ills of democracy is more democracy,” said Jane Addams who was a Progressive Era suffragette, reformer, social worker, a leader of the settlement house movement, co-founder of Hull House, philosopher, author, Nobel Peace Prize winner and co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union. I would say that Ms. Addams knew something about democracy,

Ms. Addams would certainly have supported Boston’s home rule petition on Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) as “more democracy.”

Sometimes a case can be illustrated best by an anecdote. In 2020 there was race in the Fourth House District to replace Joe Kennedy III that attracted nine candidates in the Democratic primary. In that race, as in almost all political races in Massachusetts, the winner of the primary was decided by the candidate with the highest plurality. Jake Auchincloss received 22.4% of the vote, beating his closest rival, Jesse Merrill, who got 21.1% of the votes.

Even with this tiny minority, Auchincloss was declared the winner. Had ranked choice voting been used the outcome would probably been much different. In the RCV system each voter could have been given four votes to rank: their first choice would have been given 4 points, the second choice would get 3 points, third choice 2 points and fourth choice 1 point. In the final tally, each candidate would have all of their points added and the candidate with the most points would have been announced as the winner. Auchincloss was considered the most conservative of all of the candidates while all the other eight were touted as variously liberal, but they split the vote.

If RCV had been in place, it is likely that Merrill would have accumulated many of the second, third and fourth positions of the generally liberal Fourth District and overcome Auchincloss’ meager 1.3% plurality advantage.

The process for making RCV the system for municipal voting in Boston begins with passage of a home rule petition in the City Council that is signed by the Mayor. Mayor Wu supports the home rule petition ordinance filed by Council President Ruthzee Loiujeune with eight Council cosponsors (seven is the minimum needed to pass). The petition is then submitted to the state legislature. Even after that is accomplished passage of a referendum by Boston voters will probably be necessary.

It may be preaching to the choir to advocate to Boston voters to support the home rule petition for RCV as 62% of us voted for RCV in 2020 when it was Question 2 on the state-wide ballot. Also, one version or another of RCV is already in place in Alaska, Maine, Hawaii, New York City, Cambridge and Easthampton MA, 23 cities and towns in Utah and dozens of cities and counties around the country. There is no counter argument to RCV other than a fear (mostly voiced by fact averse Republicans) that it is confusing or hard to understand. However, wherever surveys of voters have been taken, 85-95% report that they are not confused and the ballot instructions were clear and easily understood.

There are a number of positive benefits that RCV promotes:
• Ranked choice voting encourages candidates to appeal to all voters, while discouraging them from attacking each other for fear of alienating potential supporters. To everyone’s relief.

• Voter power, trust, and engagement are increased because the choices by preliminary voters are increased and thereby their voices are heard as their candidates move forward to the final. Many people who vote in the preliminary election do not return for the final because their candidate did not make the cut. As has been shown elsewhere, the voter turnout for the final will likely show a marked increase.

• Barriers to running are decreased because potential candidates do not fear splitting the vote in their voting community and so more candidates will be willing to run.

• RCV will protect and expand the city’s current inclusive process by helping ensure “Every Voice is Heard and Every Vote Counts.”

• In short, RCV is “more democracy” by increasing voter trust, choices, empowerment, inclusion and power.

The Ward 15 Democratic Party Committee studied RCV and we were convince that it would improve democracy in the City. We voted overwhelmingly to endorse the campaign to pass it in Boston. That endorsement will hopefully encourage the decision makers to vote for the home rule petition for RCV in the cause of “more democracy.”

The Mayor and Council do not need encouragement.

The obvious bottleneck is the state legislature, the least transparent and least productive in the country. They are currently on a five-month vacation leaving every one of Mayor Wu’s agenda items undone along with many hugely important state-wide issues. If you have the ability to influence a state legislator, let them know that you demand passage of RCV in Boston.