Testimony In Opposition to Georgia SB 355: An act to prohibit the use of ranked-choice voting
Testimony from:
Marc Hyden, Director of State Government Affairs, R Street Institute
In Opposition to SB 355: “To amend Article 1 of Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to general provisions regarding elections and primaries, so as to prohibit the use of ranked-choice voting; to provide for certain exceptions; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.”
January 23, 2023
Senate Ethics Committee
Chairman and members of the committee,
My name is Marc Hyden. I am a Georgia voter and the director of state government affairs at the R Street Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization. Our mission is to engage in policy research and outreach to promote free markets and limited, effective government in many areas, including safe, secure and accessible voting reforms. That is why SB 355 is of special interest to us.
As a research institution, we have studied instant run-offs using ranked-choice voting (RCV) extensively and believe that it ought to be a non-controversial reform. For those of you unfamiliar with it, “RCV asks voters to rank the candidates in order of preference. These rankings can then be used to conduct an instant-runoff election, where candidates are eliminated one-by-one until one candidate reaches a majority of support,” wrote my colleague and elections expert Matt Germer.
In short, RCV is as simple as 1-2-3, and holds the promise of numerous benefits. Our current system requires that candidates obtain 50 percent plus one vote in order to claim victory. If no candidate achieves that goal because more than two candidates are running, then that triggers a run-off election weeks later. In essence, this extends the campaign season as voters are inundated with unwanted mailers, robocalls and door-knockers. While Georgia law does not currently allow for instant-runoffs, RCV could be a useful tool to eliminate the need for the traditional run-off elections.
RCV would also ensure that more Georgians have their vote counted. Historically, fewer voters cast votes in run-offs, but the instant run-off model would change that. It guarantees that every person who votes in an election would have a voice in a potential run-off because they are given the chance to rank candidates on Election Day. More voter engagement should be encouraged, and RCV does just that.
It would also provide massive cost-savings. A study by Kennesaw State University pegged the cost of Georgia’s 2020 senatorial election run-off at a whopping $75 million, and those costs are likely only going to continue surging thanks to Georgia’s growing population and rising expenses associated with voting administration. However, taxpayer money could be saved by eliminating traditional run-offs and replacing them with an instant run-off system.
This isn’t some untested theoretical framework either. Instant runoffs are already in place in numerous other states—either for local, state or federal elections—like in Utah and Alaska. It is also used throughout much of the South for overseas and military voters. If it is safe and beneficial for them, it would seem as though it would be for the rest of the population too.
To be absolutely clear, this sort of a system is not currently allowed in Georgia, save for overseas and military voters, and this bill will not affect them. Rather, it is intended to pre-emptively forbid the use of ranked-choice voting in any local, state or federal election in Georgia, even though its use is already impermissible for non-military and non-overseas voters. This is legislation in search of a problem, when in reality ranked-choice voting offers a solution to our troubled run-off model.
For all of these requests, I respectfully request the committee members to reconsider their support for the bill.
Thank you for your time.
Marc Hyden
Director, State Government Affairs
R Street Institute
(404) 918-2731
[email protected]