How Colorado's Proposition 131 reform initiative would change elections

Proposition 131 on Colorado’s November ballot proposes significant changes to how many high-profile elections would be conducted.

If passed by voters, the measure would apply to races for state offices (including for statewide officials and the legislature) and federal representatives to Congress. In each race, an open primary would be held for all candidates — instead of party primaries — with up to four top vote-getters advancing to the general election.

In that fall election, the winner would be determined through ranked-choice voting, a process that supporters argue is more likely to result in a consensus candidate winning the election.

Here is how that system would play out in one hypothetical scenario — a future race for governor.

The race

Let’s zoom forward to 2034, when five Democrats are running for governor. So, too, are three Republicans, a Libertarian and an unaffiliated candidate.

The June primary

In the open primary race at the end of June, all 10 candidates appear on the ballot together — and all registered voters, regardless of their party affiliation or unaffiliated status, can participate. Each voter selects one candidate to support. The top four finishers in the results are three Democrats — Jim, Jill and Alex — and a Republican named Sam. (Sorry, anonymous Libertarian and unaffiliated candidates).

The November general election

Jim, Jill, Sam and Alex then appear on the November ballot. But this time, voters don’t just vote for one. They fill in bubbles next to each candidate’s name and rank them in order of preference, 1 through 4.

Round 1: As votes are tabulated on Election Day, only voters’ No. 1 choice is counted initially. If a candidate receives a majority of those votes, then that’s it — that candidate is the next governor of Colorado. But in this scenario, Sam receives 35% of the top-ranking votes, Jill receives 32%, Alex receives 22% and Jim receives 11%. Since nobody receives a majority, the lowest vote-getter — Jim — is eliminated.

Round 2: Jim’s supporters still have a voice. Any ballot that had Jim chosen first automatically reverts to that voter’s next-ranked choice — and their vote now counts for that candidate. After Jim’s 11% vote share is reallocated to the remaining candidates by his supporters’ preferences — 5% to Jill and 3% apiece to Sam and Alex — the standings are: Sam with 38%, Jill with 37% and Alex with 25%. Again, nobody has a majority, so Alex is automatically eliminated.

Round 3: This time, Alex’s 25% share is reallocated to those voters’ next-ranked candidates (among those still active), with 16% added to Jill’s total and 9% to Sam’s total. The final standings are: Jill with 53% and Sam with 47%.

The outcome

Though Sam had the highest vote share initially, Jill wins the election with 53% of votes in the final round of tabulation. She has emerged as the candidate with the broadest support among voters — including those who didn’t give her their top ranking.

What are some caveats to ranked-choice voting?

Some voters may not rank all the candidates in the race. That risks their ballots becoming inactive if their ranked candidates have been eliminated, since their votes can’t be reallocated. Because of this, it’s possible that the eventual winner of a close final round may not win the majority of all votes originally cast.

_____