Letters: Real choice will come with ranked-choice voting

Colorado is ready for the real choice that comes with ranked-choice voting

Re: “Colorado isn’t ready for ranked-choice voting, yet,” Oct. 20 editorial and “Think your ballot was cumbersome this year? Just wait for ranked-choice voting,” Oct. 20 commentary

The Editorial Board is right that Prop 131 would mean “better choices for voters.” But it is wrong that Colorado isn’t ready for open, all-candidate primaries. The contrary: Colorado is uniquely positioned to lead the nation toward better representation and more functional governance.

We shouldn’t accept an election system where most of us don’t have a voice. In our research at Unite America, in 2022, just 13% of eligible Coloradans cast ballots in competitive elections in the state House that weren’t already predetermined by party. This year, seven of our eight U.S. representatives were effectively decided in party primaries by just 6% of eligible voters.

Party primaries deny the vast majority of Coloradans — Republicans, Democrats, and independents — a true say in their representation. When candidates only need to win the support of a fraction of the most engaged primary voters to get elected, they have little incentive to compromise and get things done. It’s no wonder that Colorado’s legislature is ranked one of the most polarized in the nation — unable to address important issues even when the vast majority can find agreement.

With open, all-candidate primaries, Prop 131 would upgrade our gold standard elections to platinum. Every voter would have the freedom to vote for any candidate, regardless of party, in the primary. The top four finishers would advance to the November election, where whoever earns majority support wins. That’s common sense.

Colorado has the opportunity to once again be a national leader on election reform. Vote yes on Prop 131.

Nick Troiano, Denver

Editor’s note: Troiano is executive director of Unite America.

The Post editorial on Sunday stated that Colorado isn’t ready for Rank Choice Voting (RCV).

I would say the main reason someone would want to vote for Proposition 131 is because they are tired of the two-party system that keeps getting more and more divisive with each election cycle. No one disagrees with this. But many folks think RCV is too difficult for us. Why don’t we decide what is too difficult?

Do you remember in school when you were asked to rank your favorite x (let’s say animals, for fun). So you are asked to rank them from 1 as your favorite down to 10 as your least favorite. That’s rank choice. RCV is a way to make more choices available to us.

Everything in life is a learning curve to some degree. That is no reason not to do something that is good for us. We work through it and then it becomes second nature. I think that we all are ready to end this two-party system and the first step in doing so is to vote yes on RCV.

Debbie Daehnick, Morrison

Let’s objectively examine why Prop 131 is a uniquely unfair and anti-democratic idea. Prop 131 eliminates party-affiliated primary voting, and it introduces the clearly undemocratic practice of ranked voting.

First, a healthy republic requires competing parties that promote the unique values of their constituent groups and differentiate candidates based on their support of those values. Prop 131 dilutes this critical element of American elections by allowing both non-party and unaffiliated voters to select the other party’s candidate in the primary elections. The result is that the minority party’s best candidates may never get to the general election.

Second, Prop 131 eliminates the concept of “one person, one vote.” In this undemocratic scheme, a citizen casting a vote for a fringe candidate who falls outside the top four most popular candidates gets an automatic second vote with their next choice on the ballot. The person who votes for one of the top two candidates in the general election gets no such second vote. This is clearly an extremely un-American value system.

Conrad A. Widman, Colorado Springs

Saying “your vote is thrown out” when your preferred candidate list is exhausted is, at best, disingenuous. In the current mode, every vote not for a non-winning candidate is “thrown out.”

Ranked choice is about getting the most consent of the governed. It lets you say “anyone but them.” If you hate a certain candidate (because, for example, they tried to subvert an election and fomented political violence, then committed treason under the Logan Act after leaving office in an attempt to get reelected), you would be able to vote your conscience first on whatever third-party candidate you love. After their inevitable defeat in the first or second round, you would get to vote for the consensus candidate. It gives you more votes, not less!

Jeremy Holmes, Denver

I am tired of voting for the most electable or least offensive candidate, aren’t you? Prop 131 provides a way to voice our preferences positively rather than negatively.

In Colorado registered independents now significantly outnumber either Democrats or Republicans. Nevertheless, we maintain a partisan primary system, which grants the two main political parties power far beyond their share of the electorate. Although independents can participate in the primary of their choice, the selected general election candidates are still partisans.

Parties have value, but is that the most important quality of a candidate, let alone of our office holders?

In almost all cases, our current system provides but two viable choices, which we rank in a simple binary manner: yes to A, no to B. Ranked choice voting gives us the opportunity to consider a range of candidates — say A through D for me, as in “I really like A, but failing that would be happier with B than with C; D however is right out!” Your equally valid range could be D through A. In this fashion, we will trend toward electing more Bs and Cs, the people who will be more likely to compromise and, therefore, to get work done for us, the voting public.

Rather than choosing the lesser of evils, Prop 131 provides a mechanism to vote for a candidate rather than against one. Please join me in support of this new system, one which places the interest of the people ahead of party.

Christopher Anderson, Denver

The idea that all Democrats sit quietly on the far left of the political spectrum, as the supporters of  Proposition 131 suggest, could only be made by someone who has never been to a Democratic Convention or even a precinct caucus. This sponsor wants to continue the destructive effect of the law that opened primary elections to party nonmembers. What other organization would want nonmembers to help select its leaders?

Parties help citizens learn how our democracies work. Leaders educate citizens, especially those active in politics, about the issues, and, in turn, citizens educate their leaders about their needs. Politics is the training ground for future elected officials and one of the few remaining institutions that creates community among diverse groups of people.

Proposition 131 is really two proposals that reduce the role of political parties. First, it puts all the candidates of any party, or no party, on the primary ballot.  Unlike candidates chosen by political parties, these candidates may be unknown to anyone and inexperienced in government processes. The top four vote-getters are declared the winners of the primary.

The second part of Prop. 131 requires voters to select their first, second, third and fourth choices to be elected to each office. This is supposed to give voters more choices, but the primary system doesn’t guarantee that any of the choices will be desirable.

What our government needs is one highly qualified person for each office.

For a mind-boggling description of this process, see the 2024 State Ballot Information Booklet sent to every voter. Then vote no on Proposition  131.

Pat Pascoe, Denver

Proposition 131, while masquerading as a classic Rank Choice Voting (RCV) strategy to help level the playing field, will actually accomplish the opposite if passed. This may surprise you. As a long-time proponent of RCV, I was shocked to learn about the origins of Proposition 131 and the truth about how it will impact Colorado elections. Here’s what you need to know before you vote on this measure.

This is not a grassroots effort — it came from a group who didn’t consult election officials before putting this model on our ballot.  The measure is not a traditional RCV model, but rather creates jungle primaries, forcing candidates to raise and spend more money than ever to gain name recognition and success at the polls, both in the crowded all-candidate primary and again in the general election when they’re running against not one, but three other candidates. While some RCV models can provide greater opportunities for little-known candidates, Proposition 131 opens Colorado elections up to more dark money and outside influence. Under this system, independently wealthy candidates will have a distinct advantage over everyday Coloradans.

This measure is so far from what’s best for Colorado elections that even groups like Ranked Choice Voting for Colorado don’t support it. County clerks across the state have also raised significant concerns regarding the implementation timeline and administrative burdens the passage of this measure would create. This measure is not in the best interest of everyday Coloradans running for office, or our county election officials. Please vote “no” on Proposition 131.

Katherine Jarvis, Denver

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.