[MUSIC]

Brigid Bergin: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Brigid Bergin filling in for Brian today. Good morning again, everyone. There's a new documentary that debuted at the Angelica East Village this past weekend, and it's quite timely, given the current election cycle, and ongoing conversations about the health of our democracy. The film is called Majority Rules, and it's about ranked-choice voting in the United States. That's, of course, an electoral system in which voters can rank their candidates in order of preference.

Some listeners might be familiar with this system, because we adopted a version of it here in New York City in 2019 just for primaries and special elections. If you voted in that last Democratic Mayoral primary in 2021, the one where Eric Adams beat out other Democrats like Kathryn Garcia and Maya Wiley, you've done ranked-choice voting, but that's only here in the city, and it's only for primaries and special elections, not for state-level races, or federal elections, at least not yet.

Joining me today is AJ Schnack, the Director of Majority Rules, and Tim Dunn, the Executive Director of Unite New York, an organization which advocates for election reform, and supports expanding the use of ranked-choice voting. Tim, AJ, thank you both for coming on the show.

Tim Dunn: You bet. Thank you.

AJ Schnack: Thank you.

Brigid Bergin: AJ, your documentary focuses on the congressional elections that took place in Alaska back in 2022. How did that version of ranked-choice voting come to exist, and how did it exactly work?

AJ Schnack: Well, Alaska did something that no state had done before in the history of the country. They voted to put in a system where basically a couple of things would happen. In the primary, every single voter, including independents, would get the same ballot, and it listed every single person who was going to run for each office.

In the House race, Alaska only has one house member. They had a special election, and 48 people ran [chuckles] for that position. When they went for the special primary, they got to choose between 48 people, and then the top 4 finishers moved on to a general election. It was in that general election, where then they would have the opportunity to rank candidates in order of preference.

That was the race that people might be somewhat familiar, where Sarah Palin decided that she was going to try to run for Alaska's House seat, but they voted to do it in 2020, and then 2022, which is when we were filming, that was the first time Alaska did it, and the first time anyone in America did it.

Brigid Bergin: Wow. You got to watch how that race played out. Tim, you work in election reform here in New York State, how did you and AJ connect?

Tim Dunn: Well, AJ has done some great work on a number of different films in the election reform space, and we had an opportunity to get connected through our national partner, Unite America, and learn more about this effort. We were thrilled to get involved, and hosted an awesome premiere event last week at the theater, and are really excited about the film, and the reforms. It really brings it home for voters.

Brigid Bergin: Most states, New York included, use closed-party primaries, where only voters who are registered with a party that is holding the primary are able to vote. This film suggests that the system really maybe exacerbates that kind of hyper-partisanship and extremism that has really come to color a lot of our federal politics. Here's a little clip of the film.

Speaker 1: Primaries discourage elected officials from engaging in consensus-building, and compromise with the other party out of a fear that their own primary voters will punish them.

Speaker 2: Joe, member of Congress, is sitting around the office thinking, "I can win this district, but only if I win the primary, so I better not screw with the NRA, if they're Republican," or, "I better not ever say, 'No', to the public employees' union, if they're a Democrat." It becomes a chokehold.

Speaker 3: Since the primary is the whole ballgame, fear of being primaried pretty much shapes congressional behavior. Everyone has been slow to catch on to this. Everyone.

Brigid Bergin: It's pretty chilling. I want to get both of your reactions to this. Just if you can explain a little bit more why primaries are so important, how does this fear of being primaried shape Congressional behavior, and then, ultimately, lead to polarization? AJ, why don't you kick things off?

AJ Schnack: This was one of the things that was a real surprise to me when I was making the film--[sound cut]

Brigid Bergin: AJ? Tim, are you there?

Tim Dunn: I am.

Brigid Bergin: Okay. Well, Tim, let's pick up in terms of how you see this role of primaries playing out here in New York?

Tim Dunn: Well, the closed primary process really has a chilling effect on outcomes, and it really leads to greater polarization. We just had party primaries just last week in New York, and there were 44 primaries held across the state. The average turnout was only 15%. That's abysmally low. What that does is, then that allows the candidates in those elections to really just cater to the most extreme elements of the party that are voting in these elections.

A great example, a lot of these elections are decided by the primary. The general elections are-- We have districts where the enrollment advantage is so steep, that the primary election decides the race. For example, New York State Assembly District 41, Helene Weinstein not running for re-election. The Democratic primary in that district is going to decide the outcome because there are four times the Democrats than Republicans in that district.

A mere 9% of eligible voters participated in that primary. 3,811 people decided who's going to be the assembly representative in that district. That is not democratic, that is not representative, and it's not good for our country, or for our state.

Brigid Bergin: We had a little bit of a technical issue there with AJ Schnack. We're trying to get him back. When we do, we will bring him back into this conversation. Listeners, have you ever voted in an election that uses ranked-choice voting, either here in New York City, or elsewhere in the country? If so, what do you make of it? What do you think of it? Did you feel like your voice mattered more, or less, or have you been left out of the primary system altogether, because you're not registered with any one party? Call in and tell us your story. The number, 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. You can call or text at that number.

I want to play a clip from the show last week when Brian took a call related to that primary that you were just talking about. This is from Travis in Dyker Heights during a segment about New York primaries.

Travis: We have this situation where we don't have ranked-choice voting in these state and federal primaries. You'll recall two years ago, Dan Goldman won with fewer than 30% of the vote, and he had many candidates to the left. He won fair and square, but he almost certainly wouldn't have won, if there was ranked-choice voting. I'm wondering if there are any races-- I see a couple of races, for example, in Manhattan, the 68th Assembly District. The incumbent won with less than 45% of the vote, someone named Edward Gibbs.

Is that maybe the reason why the State Legislature doesn't want to approve ranked-choice voting throughout the state? Because unpopular incumbents would, perhaps, draw a lot of challengers that would split the vote against the incumbents.

Brigid Bergin: Travis has a lot going on with that call, both some assessment of primary turnout, and then also a little check-in on the state of advancing ranked-choice voting legislation here in New York. AJ, do we have you back?

AJ Schnack: Yes. I'm back. Sorry.

Brigid Bergin: Okay, great. AJ, why don't you, since you were talking about the role of the primary, and how it can lead to partisanship, lead to potentially excluding people from the democratic process, if you could react a bit to that part of what Travis was saying? Then, Tim, maybe you can come in, and talk about the state of ranked-choice voting legislation in New York.

AJ Schnack: Yes, I think one of the things that he was pointing to is what we see anywhere, where people try to bring in voting reforms. If someone is already in power, whether it's an individual elected official, or it's a party that feels like they understand the rules, they understand how to win under a current system, then saying like, "Well, we should change the rules."

I guess you could say, naturally, they look at that and go, "Well, this is going to hurt me, so I'm against it." I think we can look at a lot of these races, particularly, when there's more than, say, two or three candidates, and where you have the chance that someone's going to end up winning with 30-some percent. Is that really who the majority would like to be in that seat?

I think that that's one of the benefits of ranked-choice voting is, you're guaranteed that you're going to get to that majority victor, and you're not going to have to go through a costly runoff election in order to get there.

Brigid Bergin: Tim, what about what Travis is saying about the state of ranked-choice voting here in New York. He suggests that it's something that the State Legislature doesn't want to approve. What's your sense of where things are at this point?

Tim Dunn: Well, I absolutely agree that ranked-choice voting in New York State would improve outcomes. We would be in a situation where we would definitely have a majority winner at the conclusion of an election through the instant runoff process. I think the good thing is, despite the fact that we only have it at the city level, and not the state level, there actually is legislation right now in the State Assembly that would alleviate this, and would implement state-wide ranked-choice voting.

Awesome legislation, Assembly Bill 479, sponsored by Brooklyn's own Bobby Carroll that would implement ranked-choice voting on a state-wide basis in any state or local race, where more than two candidates have filed. The cool part about that is, it's not just ranked-choice. That legislation would enable a open primary, so that in one of these cases where you have more than two candidates filed, maybe a Republican, a Democrat, an independent, it may be three Democrats and a Republican, you would have a single primary, where all candidates were competing, all voters could vote.

Then, using ranked-choice voting, you'd narrow that down to two candidates to advance the general election, maybe a Republican and a Democrat, maybe two Democrats, two Republicans, two independents, who knows, but ultimately, you're getting closer to having candidates, representative of the opinions and feelings of the majority of voters, not this tiny percentage of party stalwarts to participate in our primaries.

Brigid Bergin: Just to clarify on that, Tim, would that proposed legislation apply to all state elections, or state and federal? I don't know if I heard which elections it would actually apply to.

Tim Dunn: As currently structured, that would apply to all state and local elections. It would obviously go a little different than what was done in New York City, where it's focused specifically on the party primaries, but it really would expand that concept, and it's based off of success in both Alaska and California. I would say that New York and Brooklyn is lucky to have someone like Bobby Carroll that's seen around the corner, and looking for solutions here.

Brigid Bergin: If you're just tuning in, we're talking about ranked-choice voting with AJ Schnack, the Director of a new documentary called Majority Rules, and Tim Dunn, the Executive Director of Unite New York, an organization which advocates for election reform. We're going to go to the phones. Let's talk to Sarah in Washington, DC. Sarah, thanks for calling.

Sarah: Hello. I think I understand a lot of the benefits that ranked-choice voting can have on encouraging new candidates to run, and creating primaries where candidates have to appeal to a wider range of voters, but I think I've never seen a ranked-choice result where the person who won the first ballot did not ultimately win. Is there an example of that? If there isn't, what does that say about the process?

Brigid Bergin: Good question. Thanks, Sarah. Tim, AJ?

Tim Dunn: Well, off the top of my head, I don't have an example that jumps to mind for other states, but I think what's interesting is, if you look at Alaska, and one of the great things that AJ's film explores is that, in the same election in 2022, the same election at the same time, with the same voters, you had three very different types of candidates elected.

You had a conservative Republican governor, a moderate Republican United States Senator, and a Democrat member of the House, all elected on the same day, in the same election, by the same voters. That really speaks to really voters embracing the candidates, and not their party labels.

AJ Schnack: There was a case in Maine in the very first Congressional race that was run under ranked-choice voting in Maine's 2nd district where Jared Golden had been slightly behind on initial results, but when the votes of the third and fourth place candidates were redistributed, he ended up taking the lead, and winning that seat. It does happen, or we'll see that candidates get closer, and you can see a closer representation of how votes would go, but often, it is the case that whoever is leading on election day, does end up winning even with ranked-choice.

Brigid Bergin: Let's go to Anna in Brooklyn. Anna, thanks for calling WNYC.

Anna: Hi. Thanks so much for taking my call. I, as others have said, agree with the conception of ranked-choice voting, and anything to get more people out to vote, I think is good. The concern that it raises for me is, it feels like there's some sort of strategy involved. I remember when there was the last mayoral primary, and I heard from multiple friends, other sources around, this is-- You should, obviously, put your first choice first, but if you're very against somebody, this is how you should do the rest of your ballot.

I think there were five slots, I ended up only putting three. Afterwards a friend said to me, "Oh, no, that's terrible. You should have filled in all five, even if they were-- Because this," so I think that it can feel overwhelming, in that, it feels like there's something you should be doing [chuckles] that you don't know that you should be doing. I think that, that in and of itself could turn people from voting.

If we were to go state-wide, I think public education and voter education around how it works, and dispelling any myths about being strategic, if that's correct, which I think it is, but I'm not 100% sure, I think would be really important in getting people to actually buy into it.

Brigid Bergin: Anna, can I ask you, now that you have participated in an election where you have used ranked-choice voting, does it still feel as daunting to you? Are you still feeling that sense of anxiety about it, or now that you've done it, it feels a little less challenging as it did the first time you did it?

Anna: For me, I go out and vote no matter what. I just voted in the primary, and there was one judgeship on my ballot. I will vote if it's like the most meaningful election, [chuckles] just because I think it's very important. I will go out and vote, regardless. I think that I would like to hear from somebody with expertise on how the system works around, are there advantages or disadvantages to only having one candidate, only having two candidates, et cetera.

Again, if there are no advantages, and it's just like, if you like these three people, and you don't like anybody else, put those three people, and it makes no difference in terms of not voting-- Weighing on votes for the person that you really don't want. That's not the right word, but I think you know what I mean. I think just getting that clarity. For me, I will do it no matter what, but I think for other people, maybe they wouldn't.

Brigid Bergin: Well, Anna, let's get some expert reaction to your question. Tim is someone who's looking at this system here in New York. She's obviously talking about New York City's ranked-choice voting system. What would be your advice to Anna, or someone like Anna who might have questions about the strategy in ranked-choice voting?

Tim Dunn: No, those are great questions, Anna. I think you hit one really important topic right-- Hit the nail on the head, that's voter education. I think folks can check out our website uniteny.org and learn more about ranked-choice voting, and how it works, and how they can learn more. There's even some interesting videos there on how the reform works, but here's what we found in 2021 with the implementation in New York City.

One of the things we talk about is, we think ranked-choice voting will drive up turnout. Actually, in 2021, we saw an increase of 65,000 voters more participating in that Democratic primary than did eight years earlier. I think there's a lot of great empirical evidence there, but we can't just sit back, and hope folks are going to figure it out. Most voters found that it was easy to use, and it was logical, but we're going to continue to beat the drum there.

Common Cause New York has done great work on this. The Final-Five effort in New York has done great work, but I think if you start with our website, you get a little primer on ranked-choice voting, and we're going to continue to beat that drum, and make sure folks learn about this, because it's such a vital reform.

Brigid Bergin: Maybe just for a moment, so we clarify the difference between the ranked-choice voting that we saw in the film, versus what we do here in New York City, either AJ or Tim, can you talk about the way it was used in Alaska, and how that is different from the ranked-choice voting systems we use here in New York City?

AJ Schnack: Sure. In Alaska, the ranked-choice piece was used in the general election in November, whereas here in New York City, it was used in the primary to narrow down and get the Democratic nominee that was going to be Eric Adams. Then, that was the June primary election, and then you knew he was the candidate all the way through to the November election. The way that they were doing it in Alaska, and some other states are looking at now is by giving everybody-- Right now, some independent voters are not allowed to vote in the primary election, in a closed primary, they don't really-- Unless they say, "Well, I'm a Republican today, or I'm a Democrat today." They don't have the opportunity to even have a say in that election, which is in most seats and most races going to be the most important.

In the Alaska style, then you have a choice of everybody gets to vote. Then, that narrowing down process of getting to a top four happens, so that between the primary and the general election, you can really look at those four candidates, or those five candidates, if people go to a top five system, and say like, "Okay, this is now who I'm going to be looking at and ranking, and making the choice of who fits my values the most, and they're my number one, and who else do I want to rank of the candidates that are in the race."

Tim Dunn: AJ's film does a great job of illustrating this in Alaska, because you can actually see over the course of the film, the evolution in the candidate's approach, where, I believe it was Sarah Palin started off by telling people, "Don't rank, just mark me down, just vote for me." She was unsuccessful. As the campaign rolled on, you saw candidates changing their strategy, and telling a different story and saying, "Vote for me. If you don't vote for me, rank me second." Naturally, what we saw from that, and I think we saw it in New York City as well, is less of a tendency of candidates to attack one another.

Because if you're a supporter of another candidate, and someone attacks your candidate, you're much less likely to rank them, and include them in the voting. That becomes a really, really important evolution in our politics. We don't have to look very far to see just how toxic our politics are with name-calling and mud-slinging. I think that's really an important feature that AJ's film really highlights.

Brigid Bergin: I'm curious, from the film, and then also from the work that you have done, Tim, looking at ranked-choice voting in other places. We've had it in the city since it was adopted in 2019. It was in use in the 2021 elections. It was not until the very end of that Democratic primary that we've been talking so much about where Eric Adams was nominated for the mayoral nomination that we saw candidates adjust their strategy.

We saw Kathryn Garcia and Andrew Yang team up together on the campaign trail just in the last two weeks really of that particular campaign. Is that something that you see more of in ranked-choice voting elections in places that have had it for longer? Does that happen sooner in some of those other places?

AJ Schnack: I think we're still seeing some experimentation around the country. These elections are all unique. States and cities do things differently than other states and cities. There is this tendency that we're starting to see that you mentioned that we don't always see where candidates will say, "Hey. We have similar values. We're fighting for the same thing. If you like one of us the best, rank that person number one, but rank the other person number two, so that one of us can get those values and be part of the final election conversation." You do start seeing more cooperation, which I think is also what Tim was mentioning.

It changes the way in which these elections are run, that they're not so filled with anger and name-calling. You actually have to see candidates say like, "Hey, go ahead and vote for the person that you like the most, but hey, I'm a good number two choice for you," or vice versa. It changes the way candidates present themselves to the electorate.

Tim Dunn: Yes. It's really an innovation. I think as you look at how we voted, we voted in New York the same way for a long time. The film actually does a great job in talking about the history of primaries, and how they came along. In that, our election system has not been structured universally across 50 states in the same manner. This is an opportunity for both our government officials, our elections administrators, and candidates to evolve and innovate, and hopefully, for the better.

Brigid Bergin: Let's go to Bernard in Brooklyn Heights. Bernard, thanks for calling WNYC.

Bernard: Yes. Thanks so much. We definitely have moved the ball down the field here in New York City, but we don't have open primaries. You mentioned the 2021 election, which is very instructive, I think. There's 1.7 million New York City registered voters that are not Democrats. Looking back at 2021, there were five democrats that got more votes on the first day than did Curtis Sliwa, the Republican.

I have to recall that Eric Adams barely nudged out Kathryn Garcia less than 1% of the vote when all the ranked-choice, but my point is that, we ended up in a situation where in the June, 2021, we knew that Eric Adams was going to be the next mayor, [chuckles] so let's be honest. The next five months, there was no real debate. I think Brian's show felt obligated to have Curtis Sliwa on your show. He was the Republican nominee.

I don't want to be mean, but let's face it, Curtis Sliwa is kind of the Mickey Mouse of New York City politics. I'm sorry, Curtis, you've earned that categorization. We really need open primaries here.

Lastly, I would say, it would actually empower Republicans and non-Democrats in New York City, because they could still vote for Curtis first in the open primary, but then they could rank a more conservative Democrat, for example, second. We really need to-- My question is, would a charter revision allow us to change that in New York City? Do we have to wait on the State Legislature to have both open primaries, and ranked-choice voting?

Brigid Bergin: Bernard, thanks for that question.

Tim Dunn: Thanks, Bernard. Yes, the short answer to that question is, yes, a city charter revision could be undertaken as a citizen-initiated process. Obviously, this is important in New York City, where the first step has been taken with implementation of RCV in the primaries. When we look at the state at large, you've got 3.4 million New York voters who are currently not enrolled in a political party, that's 3.4 million New Yorkers that can't participate in any primaries. They're legally barred from participating in primaries, their tax dollars go forward to fund these primaries, but yet, they can't participate in them.

Why that number is important is, 3.4 million unaffiliated voters is more voters than are currently enrolled in the Republican, conservative, and working families' parties combined. It's the second-largest voting block in the state, and they're completely shut out of the process. That's got to change.

Brigid Bergin: Part of, I think, what's at the heart of this issue are the way, perhaps, party leaders stand to be often the biggest critics of ranked-choice voting. I want to play another clip from the film where a couple of your interviewees talk about this.

Katherine Gehl: It turns out that our two parties work very well together in one particular way, and that is behind the scenes to rig the rules of the game to protect themselves jointly from new competition.

Mike Murphy: The parties are never in the front of systemic change, because they master the current system for good or bad, and don't want to lose their comfort in knowing how to work it. Not a lot of party leaders are naturals for the cover of Do Gooder Magazine.

Brigid Bergin: [chuckles] AJ, can you expand a little bit on what they're saying there? Maybe tell us who we were hearing from, and why ranked-choice voting poses such a perceived threat to the political power of parties?

AJ Schnack: Yes. That was actually one of the things that I was really interested in, in making the film. You just heard from Katherine Gehl, who's a philanthropist and supports a lot of these kind of election reform efforts. Mike Murphy, he's a Republican strategist who worked on John McCain's campaign, and Arnold Schwarzenegger's. I think that what we see is that, in Alaska, for example, there's a repeal effort going on that's really driven by Republicans. Republicans who feel that the system did not play to their strengths, perhaps, or that they didn't get the candidates that they wanted.

Well, meanwhile, in Nevada, where it's also on the ballot this year, the opposition is coming really strongly from Democrats. Democrats who are connected to the old Harry Reid machine. The idea that they knew how to run elections, get their candidates elected. Coming in and doing anything to screw with that, is really going to make them lose power.

We've seen some efforts around the ranked-choice voting piece of it, in particular, where it's driven on a national level more by Republicans. When you go into individual states or cities, it's really whichever party feels like they already know how to win, and they don't want something like this to come in to change that.

Brigid Bergin: AJ, I'm curious, part of the argument for parties is that, that creates something of a vetting system, so that a voter who maybe doesn't have as much time to dedicate to researching all the candidates on their ballot, at least, has a sense of where this person is coming from. Going back to Alaska, that special election, that Maria Peltola ended up winning, initially, had 48 candidates on the ballot. When you have that many candidates, how are people supposed to decide who to vote for? How do you understand who any of these people are?

AJ Schnack: 48 is the-- In that case, I think that was a seat. They only have one Congressperson in Alaska. Their Congressman had unexpectedly died. He had served for over four decades, and I think there was a huge pent up demand for his seat. You're probably not always gonna have 48 candidates. I think, we're not trying to say that parties should cease to exist in that race in particular, the Alaska Republican party, they had a candidate. They were threw their weight behind a guy named Nick Begich. Sarah Palin, also was running, and she was drawing a lot of attention for, or votes from Republicans.

Parties still can have a role in vetting, in putting someone up, but they won't have the full veto power over the ability of other candidates, whether they're younger candidates, candidates who don't have the full party backing. Their ability to be part of the conversation, whether it's on the debate stage, or on the ballot. You can still have somebody else who can get in and say, "Well, that's fine if that's the incumbent, or that's the person the party blesses, but, I have a voice too, and I want to say something that's different from what they're saying." I think that this process allows that to happen.

Tim Dunn: I'd concur, and obviously, in Alaska you had the 48 candidates starting out, but when you look at how the pendulum has swung in New York, in our last gubernatorial election in 2022, we had only two candidates to choose from. There was only the Republican and the Democrat on the ballot. That's only the second time in New York state history that, that's occurred. I think the pendulum swung a little too far in excluding candidates from the ballot.

In 2022, Lee Zeldin and Kathy Hochul were anointed their parties' choice at their conventions. As such, neither candidate had to gather a single signature to get on the ballot for the Republican or Democratic line. Now, they had to go through a primary, those primaries, guess what? 15% turnout, because voters saw it as a predetermined outcome, and only a select few were able to choose.

Here's the important thing, when you look at that election, where eight different candidates attempted to establish an independent line, collecting signatures from hundreds of thousands, if not millions of New Yorkers, and they were all-- Came up short on election day, in one of the closest most competitive races we've seen in our lifetime, and for New York State Governor, two million of our unaffiliated voters stayed home, chose not to vote. That's not a healthy thing for our democracy.

Brigid Bergin: We are going to have to leave it there for now. Thank you to my guests, AJ Schnack, whose documentary Majority Rules, will be playing at the Angelica East Village through Thursday, July 4th, and Tim Dunn, the Executive Director of Unite New York, appreciate you both for coming on the show today.

Tim Dunn: Thanks so much.

AJ Schnack: Thanks so much.

 

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.