According to recent reporting by WABE, three independent and third-party candidates have qualified to be on the presidential ballot in Georgia in November. They pose a serious threat to the major parties' chances of winning in November, but it doesn't have to be this way.

This image was AI generated.

Independents Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cornel West and Claudia De la Cruz of the Party for Socialism and Liberation have collected enough petition signatures to qualify to be on the presidential election ballot in Georgia come November. Jill Stein of the Green Party aims to qualify under the brand new rule that would allow her on the ballot if she can qualify in 20 other states' ballots. That means voters could have a choice in November between seven candidates: Republican Donald Trump, Democrat Kamala Harris, Libertarian Chase Oliver, plus the four independents/third-parties mentioned previously. Well, that might be the case if these new candidates can overcome legal challenges.

The major parties, Republicans and Democrats, both have every incentive to try to keep other candidates off the ballot. The Georgia Democrats are currently pursuing lawsuits against these other four candidates for that reason. Just pause for a moment to consider that: in our representative democracy, a major party is suing to remove candidates from participating, to prevent voters from voting for those other candidates. And some of these candidates are on the same side of the political spectrum.

Why would Georgia Democrats do that? In Georgia's current electoral system, major parties are hurt by having more candidates in the race, especially by candidates with similar platforms to the major party's platform. Any voter who votes for a third party candidate is a voter who didn't vote a major party candidate. More candidates take votes away from the major parties.

The major parties live in fear of third party spoiling their victory. They mobilize money and resources in lawsuits to prevent candidates from even having access to the ballot, especially to fight against similar candidates. But can you blame them for acting this way? The first rule of governing is you have to get elected, then you can govern. The system requires that they waste their resources fighting each other.

This system we have is anti-competitive, causes division, wastes time and money, and suppress political voices.

Let's Imagine a Better World

We could fix this with a simple upgrade to our current system. Using ranked choice voting (RCV), Georgia could create a fair and efficient system for voters and candidates alike.

Using RCV, voters express a preference for candidates by ranking them: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. The candidate who gets the fewest votes is eliminated and voters' votes are automatically transferred to their next choice. This is repeated until one candidate gets a majority of the votes. You can read more about how RCV works here.

RCV is similar to Georgia's runoff system now, but instant. In fact, RCV is fully compatible with Georgia's runoff system. In 2021, the Georgia General Assembly passed SB 202, which, among other things, enacted RCV for military and overseas ballots. Instead of being mailed two ballots months apart, these overseas voters can be mailed one ranked choice ballot. In the event of a runoff, that ranked choice ballot can be used to know the voter's next choice in the runoff if their first choice is eliminated. No need for mailing a second ballot with runoff candidates. This enabled the General Assembly to also shorten elections from 9 weeks to 4 weeks.

How Major Parties Benefit

The major parties, Republicans and Democrats stand to gain a lot from RCV. Under RCV, a voter's second choice matters (and 3rd, 4th, etc.). If the voter's first choice (perhaps for a third party) can't win, their vote transfers to someone else. That means a vote for another candidate doesn't take away a vote from your candidate. Major parties have the threat of third parties taken away. They don't lose votes to third parties.

The message of the major parties shifts from "Don't vote for this other guy who is similar to me. You'll waste your vote." to "If you vote for him, make me your second choice. We stand for the same values." RCV changes the game to coalition building, instead of nasty lawsuits and negative campaigning. Similar candidates can work together to build large groups of voters based on shared values.

RCV can be a tool for the major parties to drive voter excitement and participation. Voters may vote third party or independent without being shamed for wasting votes. Voters can vote freely for their favorite candidate knowing their vote will likely transfer their second or third choice of a major party.

There is another key aspect to voter excitement. Our current runoff system sees major drop off between the general election and the runoff election. In the last two Senate elections in Georgia, we saw around 400,000 fewer voters in each runoff election. This is four times the vote margin in each election. In other words, these elections were decided by people not coming out to vote. The runoff system we have now adds a whole extra level of uncertainty to elections that could be avoided with RCV. These voters who decided not to come back for runoffs could have been retained, and in this case changed the outcome of the election.

The picture is clear, RCV is a certain upgrade to Georgia's electoral system. The Democrat and Republican parties stand to gain from Georgia adopting RCV. It would allow them to focus on building up allies instead of fighting against candidates with similar values. RCV can be a way for the major parties to excite more voters with more voices in the political conversation while not losing votes to third parties. They can also avoid the unpredictability of voter drop off in run off elections that we've see sway results in recent years.