The proposed amendment would replace Virginia's current round-by-round elimination procedure with a mathematically derived batch elimination process. Although the amendment maintains that the same eventual outcome would result, it would do so at the expense of transparency and public verifiability.

Current regulations allow election officials, candidates, the media, and citizens to observe each successive elimination and transfer of votes. This sequential process creates a clear record of how the outcome is reached and permits independent verification of each stage of the tabulation. By contrast, batch elimination compresses multiple rounds into a single computational determination, reducing the visibility of intermediate results and increasing reliance on software and specialized mathematical analysis.

The proposed change also has the effect of portraying ranked choice voting as a simpler and less complex process than it actually is. By collapsing several rounds into one, the amendment obscures the full sequence of vote transfers that would otherwise be visible under current regulations. While this may make the process appear more straightforward, it does so by limiting public visibility into how the final result is achieved. Transparency in election administration should be advanced through openness and full disclosure, not by reducing the amount of information available for public observation.

Democratic legitimacy depends not only on mathematically correct outcomes, but also on the ability of citizens to observe, understand, and independently verify the process by which those outcomes are produced. Election procedures should favor transparency and auditability over administrative efficiency, particularly in voting systems that many voters already find difficult to understand.

Election procedures should not simplify the appearance of the counting process by reducing the visibility of that process. Rather, they should maximize transparency so that the public can see and verify every stage by which election outcomes are determined.

Accordingly, the existing sequential elimination procedure should be retained. The benefits of transparency, public understanding, and independent verifiability outweigh any efficiencies that may be gained through batch elimination.