The Libertarian Party of Ohio is pushing back against legislation passed by the Ohio Senate that would bar the use of ranked-choice voting and impose funding penalties on local governments that implement it, calling the proposal “a penalty on democratic choice.”
In a November 19 statement, the party came out against Senate Bill 63, which would prohibit the use of ranked-choice voting in any Ohio election and penalize municipalities that adopt it by reducing their Local Government Fund distributions. The party argues that the ban would undermine local control, with LPO Chair Michael Sweeney calling it “a direct assault on local democracy.”
“Ohioans deserve the freedom to choose how they elect their representatives,” Sweeney said. “The state has no business punishing communities for adopting systems that give voters more voice and choice.”
Senate Bill 63 was approved by the Ohio Senate on May 8 and has since been sent to the Ohio House’s General Government Committee for further discussion and consideration. Proponents argue the bill is needed to ensure uniform election procedures statewide, while the measure has drawn criticism from groups supporting local election autonomy, including the Ohio Municipal League and Rank the Vote Ohio, with the latter being the primary organization campaigning against the ban.
In its statement, the Libertarian Party of Ohio defended ranked-choice voting as a system that encourages broader support for winning candidates and reduces concerns related to candidates deemed as spoilers or pressure on contenders to drop out early to avoid splitting the vote. The party said communities across the country using RCV have reported higher voter satisfaction, more competitive elections, and increased civility during campaigns.
“This bill is not about protecting elections,” Sweeney said. “It is about protecting entrenched political power. When state officials dictate how local elections must be run and tie compliance to funding, they cross a dangerous line. This is government overreach at its worst.”
The party called on the Ohio House to reject the measure and said voters should retain the authority to determine how their ballots are cast and counted. “Let Ohioans decide how Ohio votes,” Sweeney added. “Democracy should never come with a state-imposed penalty.”
I agree.
I fail to see why the Libertarian Party has so much of a hard-on for RCV, when it doesn’t do anything productive for third parties.
In theory, yes, but not in reality.
Reality dictates that in any given election, 40% of the voters will vote for the Republican no matter if the candidate is Mother Theresa or Joe Stalin, and 40% of the voters will vote for the Democrat no matter if the candidate is Mother Theresa or Joe Stalin, because “their” candidate is infinitely better than “the others” no matter how bad they are. These zombie voters will never change. The remaining swing 20% is actually quite stupid as a voting block, since they’re the ones who vote to put the lesser of two evils into office (still evil) and increase taxes and government (theft) regardless of how it affects them. Even if third parties got all of that 20%, they will still lose. Even in two-person races where a D or R is missing, that still happens; the missing party zombie voters simply stay home.
RCV doesn’t change that, because the zombie voters will not mark a second choice. They simply won’t, and until those ballots are considered spoiled from being incomplete, that isn’t changing. But forcing them to rank ALL choices is wrong, too, because that compels speech. It’s a no-win situation for third parties.
So why endorse it? It’s tilting at a windmill.