Alabama governor signs law banning ranked-choice voting


Alabama has officially banned ranked-choice voting after Republican Gov. Kay Ivey signed the legislation on Friday.

Ranked-choice voting has voters rank candidates in order of preference. Those candidates who receive 50% plus one or more votes win automatically. However, if no candidate gets at least 50% of the votes cast, then the lowest scoring candidate is eliminated with his votes assigned to the other candidates. The process continues automatically until a single candidate reaches 50%.

After being persuaded by Outside dark money, Alaska voters approved the scheme in the 2020 general election and it went into effect beginning in 2022. So far, only Alaska and Maine are using the system for statewide elections.

In both states, state congressional seats immediately flipped from Republican to Democrat.

In Maine, Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin to Democrat Jared Golden in 2018, even though Poliquin had the most votes on the first round.

In Alaska, Democrat Mary Peltola won the state’s only seat Alaska has in Congress, in spite of the fact that almost 60% of voters chose a Republican on the first round.

“Ranked-choice voting shall not be used in determining the election or nomination of any candidate to any local, state, or federal office,” says Alabama’s HB 186.

“I am proud to sign this bill which takes another step towards ensuring the confidence in our elections. As our Secretary of State Wes Allen put it, ranked-choice voting makes winners out of losers. Not only is ranked-choice voting confusing to voters, it also limits their ability to directly elect the candidate of their choice. Voting should be simple, and this complicated and confusing method of voting has no place in Alabama’s elections.”

The Alabama law takes effect Oct. 1, when it becomes the third state to ban ranked-choice voting this year, after Kentucky and Oklahoma did earlier. Eight states in all now ban the experimental voting method, including Florida, Idaho, Montana, South Dakota, and Tennessee.

Alaskans have a chance to dismantle the ranked-choice general election scheme, and the no-party primary that goes with it. Enough Alaskans signed a petition to repeal much of 2020’s Ballot Measure 2, and the question is set to appear on the General Election ballot in November.


  1. “After being persuaded by Outside dark money, Alaska voters approved the scheme in the 2020 general election…”
    I still think it is weird that BM 2 was losing right up until the last day that absentee ballots could be accepted/counted. Then (if we are to believe it) the final batches of absentee ballots were all for RCV and BM2. Not statistically impossible, but improbable to the point I do not believe it.

    • It’s possible IF the “final ballots” were held in reserve until needed.
      And if the “final ballots “ were curated to make sure the desired results were achieved.

      I’m not a stolen election guy. I have no problem believing our electorate is really just that stupid.
      But, and it’s a big but, the bigger statical improbability is how these “final ballots” always help the left. Always.

      • Yep, agree totally.
        A coin toss is not likely to come up heads 100 times in a row, but for some reason, last minute ballot counts seem to favor the leftists every time. Weird…

  2. Consider: Alabama has more common sense and better schools than we do.

    Difference? Alabama isn’t eaten alive by unions.

  3. “ voters approved the scheme “
    Almost makes it sound like we have a legitimate voting process and those counting are of honorable character.

  4. This gives me hopes. Murkowski has never won an election fair and square, and that is an appalling conviction of our election system.

  5. Somebody should tell Mike Porcaro that he should refuse (this time around) to make a radio commercial that tries to convince Alaskans that Ranked Choice Voting is a great idea. He screwed us over for advertising revenue that added to his bank account and needs to know this time that his decision was no good, terrible, and very bad. He needs to admit his mistake and apologize.
    Besides all this, his radio program should be dialed up a notch to attract more adult listeners and interests.

  6. The problem that ranked choice voting has created is that, can the problems that have been made, will it ever be reversed to where it was before being put into elections? RCV has to be repealed in order to find out.

  7. Whatever you might think of RCV, I believe that it is wrong for a state government (Alabama, in this case) to tell voters that they cannot select a system of their choosing (no matter how stupid it might be).

    • Because this type of system is too easily manipulated. It creates dishonest elections along with the consequences, just say Mary Peltola.

    • Agree in theory, disagree completely in practical application.
      If the State outlawed no-excuse absentee voting, or ballot drop boxes, or any other form of easily manipulated voting, that is the right of the State legislature and Governor, it is within their authority. If the voters disagree, there is a process for overturning that decision.
      This bill, now signed into law, does nothing but raise the threshold for allowing RCV. Instead of a ballot measure, it now requires a Legislator to introduce a bill to overturn this law, committees to discuss/debate, votes, and Governor signature to now allow the consideration of RCV. Hopefully, for Alabama, no proposal for RCV ever gets introduced into committee.

    • Interesting point, Anchor Point.
      No right or wrong answer… what do you see as the problem with state government telling voters they can’t select a system of their choosing?
      Not seeing a problem if the law can be overturned by petition, judged unconstitutional, or legislatively repealed.
      On the other hand, Alaska’s state senate leader makes a video telling voters they’re pretty much stuck with RCV… just because their state senators like RCV.
      If the state’s wrong for telling citizens they can’t select something of their choosing, should this also apply, for example, to things like speed limits, schools, prescription drugs, prison sentences?
      Could it be that Alabama’s law is hard to accept because the concept of traditional, open, honest elections has become so completely alien to Alaskans?

  8. “In Maine, Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin [lost] to Democrat Jared Golden in 2018, even though Poliquin had the most votes on the first round.” (What a bummer – Poliquin had the most first-round votes but lost.)

    “In Alaska, Democrat Mary Peltola won the state’s only seat Alaska has in Congress, in spite of the fact that almost 60% of voters chose a Republican on the first round.” (What a bummer, Peltola had the most first-round votes but won.)

    I’m confused. Do both these examples show the problems with RCV? If I can’t figure this out, I’d never be able to figure out something as confusing as RCV.

  9. RCV is very simple, except for the simple minded. That said I hope we can vote it out, as it is too complicated for many. And that is so unfair. For the simple minded. Who are many.

    • Nothing simple about it.
      Granted, the actual voting by an individual is straightforward, the counting is not simple, the selection of the candidates is not simple, and the ability to manipulate the system by political parties/groups is simple.
      And, that is the issue. the simplicity of manipulating the RCV to push an outcome that is contrary to what the public desires.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.