US

Ranked-Choice Voting

Rather than using second-round runoffs to settle elections in which no candidate wins a first-round majority, it would be better to use ranked-choice voting (as in the state of Maine) in which voters are encouraged to rank all of the candidates.

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Participant University Vote Confidence Bio/Vote History
Acemoglu
Daron Acemoglu
MIT
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
No voting system is perfect. Conflicts/ambiguities cannot be avoided. But ranked voting is typically better &allows for entry by new parties
Alesina
Alberto Alesina
Harvard
Disagree
9
Bio/Vote History
Altonji
Joseph Altonji
Yale
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Auerbach
Alan Auerbach
Berkeley
Strongly Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Autor
David Autor
MIT
Strongly Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Much voter preference info wasted in dichotomous voting! Rank-choice voting preferable, and could reduce bilateral party monopoly
Baicker
Katherine Baicker
University of Chicago
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Banerjee
Abhijit Banerjee
MIT
Uncertain
8
Bio/Vote History
Both are manipulable but they each have different properties
Bertrand
Marianne Bertrand
Chicago
Agree
1
Bio/Vote History
Brunnermeier
Markus Brunnermeier
Princeton Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Chetty
Raj Chetty
Harvard Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Chevalier
Judith Chevalier
Yale
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
I *think* all of the preference paradoxes that impact ranked choice voting ALSO identically impact a plurality vote + runoff voting.
-see background information here
Cutler
David Cutler
Harvard
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Saves on the cost of elections, at least.
Deaton
Angus Deaton
Princeton
Strongly Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Duffie
Darrell Duffie
Stanford
Agree
2
Bio/Vote History
Edlin
Aaron Edlin
Berkeley
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Eichengreen
Barry Eichengreen
Berkeley
No Opinion
Bio/Vote History
Einav
Liran Einav
Stanford
Uncertain
3
Bio/Vote History
Fair
Ray Fair
Yale
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Finkelstein
Amy Finkelstein
MIT
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Goldberg
Pinelopi Goldberg
Yale Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Goolsbee
Austan Goolsbee
Chicago
Uncertain
6
Bio/Vote History
Greenstone
Michael Greenstone
University of Chicago
Uncertain
1
Bio/Vote History
Hall
Robert Hall
Stanford
Disagree
9
Bio/Vote History
Expert analysis finds no general superiority for instant runoffs.
-see background information here
Hart
Oliver Hart
Harvard
Strongly Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
With a run-off, if there are several candidates, the "wrong" two may win the first round. This does not happen with a ranked system.
Holmström
Bengt Holmström
MIT Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Hoxby
Caroline Hoxby
Stanford
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
So long as voters understand that they ought to put in the effort to rank all candidates (and do so), this is a superior system to runoff.
Hoynes
Hilary Hoynes
Berkeley
No Opinion
Bio/Vote History
Judd
Kenneth Judd
Stanford
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
This gives each voter more flexibility in describing their preferences.
Kaplan
Steven Kaplan
Chicago Booth
Disagree
8
Bio/Vote History
Current System has worked well for 200+ years. Not a good idea to change.
Kashyap
Anil Kashyap
Chicago Booth
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
not perfect but avoids perverse outcomes better than first past the post.
Klenow
Pete Klenow
Stanford
Agree
1
Bio/Vote History
Levin
Jonathan Levin
Stanford
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Makes for shorter process and fewer votes; can have disadvantage if voters asked to rank many candidates based on little information.
Maskin
Eric Maskin
Harvard
Strongly Agree
10
Bio/Vote History
Ranked-choice voting leads to less vote splitting than two-round runoff voting. It also doesn't require voters to come back a second time.
Nordhaus
William Nordhaus
Yale
Agree
10
Bio/Vote History
Yes, but experience has been that it is complex and we would need to ensure that it does not lower participation.
Saez
Emmanuel Saez
Berkeley Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Samuelson
Larry Samuelson
Yale
Uncertain
1
Bio/Vote History
We have too many voting impossibility theorems to state flatly that one method is better.
Scheinkman
José Scheinkman
Columbia University
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Although rank-order voting is also subject to well known voting paradoxes
Schmalensee
Richard Schmalensee
MIT
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Not a great question to sell this scheme: what exactly does "would be better" mean?
Shapiro
Carl Shapiro
Berkeley
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Shimer
Robert Shimer
University of Chicago
Uncertain
1
Bio/Vote History
Ranked choice voting is cheaper. Second round runoffs let voters focus on leading candidates. Otherwise they are the same.
Stock
James Stock
Harvard
Agree
2
Bio/Vote History
Thaler
Richard Thaler
Chicago Booth
Strongly Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
This seems better than the status quo with 3rd party candidates altering outcomes.I don't think strategic voting would be a problem.
Udry
Christopher Udry
Northwestern
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History