Good evening. Welcome to new america. Such a nice room, comfortable chairs. Im the director of the Political Reform Program here at new america and i want to welcome you all to a discussion about the possibilities of rankedchoice voting, as folks can revive our democracy in various ways, potentially solving a bunch of differently challenges. This is an event, a a series of events for new americas 20th anniversary which is done in 1999 with the idea of creating a home for new generation of both people and ideas across a wide range of policy questions. I kind of one of the oldtimers although it wasnt your in 1999. I saw the creation of it and fundamental ideas about political, reforming the political system, part of the dna of this organization from the beginning. As my colleague lee reminded me, the book that the founders wrote called the radical center which was one of the ideas that they wrote that was not really like a bible but it is kind of hard of that. And that i was here, came back to form theo Political Reform Program in 2014 at our findings idea, like could we introduce a fresh think thinking into the conversation about the tamoxifen getting beyond the solutions. As weve evolved i think we found ideas around rankedchoice voting have happily taken on ar more salient, attracted new constituencies, begun to seem like a really viable solution when we look at it and from top topdown and we see communities kind of turning to the set of ideas as they look for themselves for how to strengthen democracy in their Kindred Spirit what we thought wed wes pull together a panel of people who are kind of working both at the big level and in the field on talking to people about these ideas, promoting these ideas, helping people understand problems to solve, with so. One thing i i would say about r approach to political reform problemsolving is like theres no super magic bullet. Theres a great essay that came out last week, there are no silver bullets. A set of ideas that have to Work Together and this can be one of them. It gets refracted through the culture and demographics of a community and a think we want to touch on some of those ideas. So without wasting a lot more of your time let me just introduce analysts and i will start with one question, get us going. And then well have a discussion in the open it up. Starting from my immediate right is grace ramsey, a consultant on Electoral Reform issues. Next, Evan Mcmullin physical than an executive director of stand up republic. He was a candidate for president in 2016 and is viewed with a slotted interest in these ideas. To his right, Christopher Lamar is Legal Counsel for Campaign Legal center, another organization that was started around the time of this one. Ive had a long connection to Campaign Legal center, figure out not the Political Legal challenges and then my colleague lee drutman who is a senior fellow in the Political Reform Program. Lee is the author of the book coming out in january called breaking the twoparty duel, the case of a multiparty democracy in america. He is even a more expansive vision. What you want to do for those of you in the room and for the cspan audience, i want to make sure we had some clarity on what were talking but here, some going to start by asking grace, not, to talk about when you are out in the community and people are curious about this idea, have heard much about it before, how would you describe it to them . I will let you do that and then well do the rest of the panel. For a little bit of context, i came to this work for the first time in 2013 in minneapolis where the use rankedchoice voting. They pass in 2006 by the voters and then had jews in 2009 but none of the races have been particularly competitive. So in 2013 those an open seat for a and plenty of Competitive City Council races so i came to this work in a boater Education Campaign to make sure it was going to factor into the resultg of the voters were aware of the system being used for one another but was going to work. In that case if it was talkingo voter whose plan on voting in the more liberal the mayoral election, its what it sounds like an voters able to rank the choices in order of preference. A lot of times with your first choice is the candidate you look up like a trace is a candidate you like and researchers is the encandidate you can see. When the count of the votes we cant just first choices if you only take the vote for the kerry camp to make sure we have an accurate view of where the voters stand. W rankedchoice voting differs is if no one gets a majority come when electing one c 20 like the candidate for majority in the system, 50 pixel know has reached the threshold you limit the candid with the youth vote andre voters who select that candidate as as a first choice would other book instantly to the secondary discontinues into one of those candidates does reach the threshold of 50 . Thats the basics. For different cities and different systems used to elect whether its a city council, mayor, whenever, festival which you can apply rankedchoice voting but for the voters the basics are you going to rank the candidates. Great. Grace, like when you talk to people about it do you say heres a problem, what do people talk about when people say what problem are you solving . Sure. One thing to be very frank that account is a good toggle politics people will provide you with the problems they see very quickly. I havent come across a book whose as of things great, lets not change anything. In different circumstances it can be applied differently. In minneapolis the situation we saw was we had in august primary that narrowed the field to two. We would see turnout from 15 to 5 , students were not back yet. This this is a large cost of thy to open up the pulse into all this but also its not necessarily an accurate view of the voters. You having 50 know thato field field and theres just this portion of power in that. The city decide to eliminate that primary election just have one general election using rankedchoice voting so having the same conversation when more voters were present. In the situation with the primary, youre talking nonpartisan, so instead of two rounds you were voting one. And there are several other situations. Their cities have adopted because that one of election where this is a problem thats on the other end of the general election. One place referred a lot of discussion and we have seen such moment outside are several examplesem weve seen whether bn really fierce parts and primers within several candidates. When you are saying things like vote splitting or a large field, you can get outcomes that are not intuitive to voters like people getting through with 25 when a majority did not approve them of a candidate. This can you wait to work that and also for party unity if you have this large field of candidates you can build a consensus rather than having a knockdown drag out fight. Does anyone want to speed to speak how i talk about . You can talk about how you see it as it relates to your area. We are all, the way we view life is through a through a prt weve already experienced. Not to get fiddles of philosophical off the bat but i spent over ten years at the Central Intelligence agency so often see a lot of the challenges from a National Security frame. This is one of them. I look at the country and the Political Polarization that we are expensing that is notpo my n assessment. Pew has this great data they collected that shows our parties moving towards extreme ideologically or lease away from each other. The more that happens, the harder it becomes to govern ourselves. Thre in this grand experience of Self Governance but we are failing to govern arsenals. Ourselves. The world is so dynamic, whether its changes in industry, changes in climate, you know, changes in the way we can make it with each other, the way information flows, opportunities and risks associated with that. We live in a Dynamic World and so, especially now we have got to be able to have a functioning government, but we dont pass budgets we dont appropriate appropriately. We dont have solutions for infrastructure issues, healthcare, information, warfare threats. So many of things, climate. And that is, i look at that and the sea and National Security threat. We are failing to govern ourselves because our parties are so divided and our adversaries abroad are seeing this and exploiting that. Opportunistic politicians exploiting that. That gives rise to either even more extreme leaders that will come to power, capitalize and exploiting those divisions and that lack of effective governance. Im one that believes weve got to change the incentives that shape the way our leaders lead here my view is that rankedchoice voting is one of a couple of reforms that i think offer the best opportunity to change those incentives so that leaders are more incentivized to find Common Ground with their rifles to demonstrate that, ground, build on that Common Ground. How does it impact policy . It impacts policy by were running against each other, grace has a strong supporters that just will never come over and support me as a first pick. But i have the opportunity to show some Common Ground with grace and hopefully winter voters second choice and maybe the same is true in return. That can give way i think two ways forward on even the most divisive policy changes challenges the country faces. Thats what motivates me, why im so passionate about this is i think the country is facing a real weakness associate with the Political Polarization that rankedchoice voting can change, can change the incentives to remedy that. Chris, how do you see rankedchoice voting evolving . I think sort of almost piggybacking off of his nice philosophical quote about the way used to this see things, working at nonpartisan organization, the thing im really concerned about is the responsiveness of politicians to voters. With rankedchoice voting one of the things you see in these elections is instead of getting come having to choose between two two candidates who on the polar opposites at the end of the spectrum in terms of political positions, that maybe are not that popular within the electorate, with rankedchoice voting the thing you see is sort of the politicians coming back into the center. And talking about ideas that are very popular amongst the electorate. Getting into policy positions, if one of the things im concerned about is uacs elections where its something is hyperpolarized youll see its more a get out the Vote Campaign of politicians think i want to make sure the 15 of the people to vote for me, i want to make sure those 15 come out and vote for me instead of making sure that i dont care less about the 50 of my group and more so focusing on the remainder of the city that im trying to get their vote. In in a way theres an implit problem, which is elections are primarily about mobilization, create a different tone than those about persuasion. Ive heard stories about people talking about campaigns when youre going doortodoor. You not on the door and say who are you voting for next summer as the first choice, but normally thats like a door slammed on your face and you go to the next house. With rankedchoice voting you can say who is your second choice, third choice, so want to so forth. Thats one of the ways so keeps the conversation going. One thing, one of the things we have discussed as a pop is the challenge in certain places that in addition to mobilization, you can have a winner who doesnt have ahe majority. That is what led to the idea of rankedchoicey. Voting. Its interesting none of you describe that as part of the problem to be addressed. It assures the wind at least has majority. Do you want to talk about you kind of have a bigger, in some ways a bigger ambition. Well, i agree. I think we have a large degree of consensus here on the panel we are in this moment of really destructive binary hyper partisanship that is a fundamental threat to our system of government which demands a high level of compromise and giveandtake. And the way our two party system is currently operating, everything is about destroying the other party. We are having this Panel Discussion as the storm clouds of impeachment cover this town, and its amazing to see what republicans are doing right now to support donald trump, despite the stream of revelations, of events he has committed and that is a function of this binary hyper partisanship. Republicans in congress cant break with trump because theres no other party for them to run at. A lot of them will not run as democrats for obvious reasons. If there were another party, centerright party, if there were a rankedchoice Voting System that creates space for third parties, it would not be treated as sparse because voting for for a third party or fourth party is not wasting your vote. You are expressing your voice. I think you would see a lot of republicans breakingof with the president and maybe running, forming a new party. I have a book coming out in january called making the twoparty [inaudible] which i advocate for rankedchoice voting and advocate for thed multiwinter choice which would create multiwinter districts and allow districts where maybe five representatives go to congress, the top five through rankedchoice voting and i would create space for multiple parties. One of the things we when look comparatively around the world, most democracies are multiparty democracy. The u. S. Is rare and strange twoparty system. Is that because americansd only want to parties. Its because we have electoral institutions that make it very hard for third parties we have winner take all verses plurality microsystems. Multiparty democracy allows for flexibility, more fluid become more Voter Engagement because voters are morede likely to fina candidate in the party that represents them. Every election is competitive. In our winnertakeall system with 85, 90 of congressional districts that not even competitive because when partisan voting is high, its clear who is going to win. Now, rankedchoice voting, it becomes all the less certain. Parties compete everywhere and voters have a real opportunity to express their voice. Although its not a a suitable because theres no fixing politics, i think rankedchoice voting, particularly multiwinter form which brings us to modest version of representation would funnily solve a lot of the core problems that are roiling our democracy at this moment. To me its the most important reform that has a chance of happening in the next five to ten years. In a way, you are almost conditioning a mechanism of rankedchoice voting is opening the door to the possibility of both multiwinter district, multiwinter systems and multiparty i assume like a grace when youre talking to people in a community and most of the people who are potential supporters of this idea, many are democrats or republicans as they start out, that might not be the best starting point, is that a solution that people are looking for . Since the 2016, whether theyre motivated or scared, whatever their reasoning is, ive seen that across the country. Weve seen turnout up in municipal elections which we havent seen in 20 years so were seeing more activity than we have and i think one thing that weve realized is i think for a long time you dont think to question the status quo. These are systems to believe had always been around. You dont think about how young it is and created right for us at the time potentially, but we werent taught to reconsider those on a regular basis unless were talking about redistricting every ten years and think about it. But the systems are still in place, right. So, i think once you give people the opportunity to think about it, ive seen largely a positive response. One thing thats been interested is the entire time ive been doing this work, its largely been in a state, mainly educating, not advocating as much. But once you introduce people to [inaudible] to people welcome them. Are welcoming to that and its just a matter of presenting it, and presenting it, ill admit i dont use plurality very often, you try to use it people are definitely open. Lets be clear since we have this audience, but define quickly plurality. Its hard to do. I dont use it anymore. Just so were clear. First i suppose is a nickname that comes from horse racing, that whoever is ahead, gets the most votes wins. Now, that doesnt necessarily mean a majority. You could get 30 of the votes and win and the other candidates get less than 30 . And this was a 1430 innovation that came from the british countryside and it replaced concensus voting which turned out to be somewhat difficult. And the framers who, they were debating a lot of things in 1787 didnt debate Electoral Systems because there was only one electoral system at the time. It was a candidate base, whoever gets the most votes wins. Thats what elections were. And it wasnt until the mid 19th century that the Electoral Reformers started innovating and started coming up with different ideas, voting, innovation, early, early, there was a tremendous proponent of it, and you know, over the course of the early 20th century, the system caught on, and australia, ireland has used it for all of these years. More than you bargain for. Definitely more than i knew. I said anybody could do this. [laughte [laughter] all right, lets pull back to, you know, kind of that Bigger Picture that we were talking about, like what, whats the potential of a system with rcv in place. Whats kind of the big dream that either you, evan, or chris have of, like what becomes possible in rcv . For me its the enactment of policies that the majority of voters agree with. I think its as simple as that in terms of what the goal is, to are me anyway for rcv, seeing politicians who are actually responsive to the things that voters want and politicians enacting things that voters actually want. [laughter] i would, you know, you have to realize now that there are politicians, many of them, who as a matter of political strateg