Power, Power, Thy Attraction Is Supreme

Democrats talk a big game about making the U.S. electoral system fairer. But, so far, they are failing to live up to that commitment in D.C.

Last November, D.C. voters overwhelmingly passed Initiative 83 to establish ranked-choice voting [RCV] in the District and allow voters unregistered with a party to participate in partisan primaries. These reforms would dramatically improve democracy in the city. Ranked-choice voting, also known as instant-runoff voting, would ensure that government officials could not be elected with just a sliver of a split vote. And semi-open primaries would give independent voters, who have long been shut out of the primary process, a voice in the city’s most important races.

But many of D.C.’s elected officials — who might face some real competition under this new system — are stalling the reforms.

That begins with Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D), who opposed the initiative and criticized ranked-choice voting ahead of last year’s election as “a very complicated election system.” Even though a large majority of voters — including most members of her own party — disagreed, she refused to include any funding in her proposed 2026 budget for the reforms, which are supposed to be in place for next year’s primary elections. [WaPo]

To review, RCV tends to favor moderate candidates, people who are less committed to ideology and more to compromise and governance. This is anathema to ideologues, of course; but ideologues, who are sometimes simply faking their positions, do tend to be the problem these days. Committed to victory at all costs, those costs include … ourselves.

Consider this a call for the D.C. officials to implement RCV post-haste, dispensing with the self-centered collection of power.