The Campaign Legal Center (“CLC”) respectfully submits these public comments to the Virginia Department of Elections in response to the Proposed Regulation for Ranked Choice Voting. 

 CLC is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting and strengthening the democratic process across all levels of government. Since the organization’s founding in 2002, CLC has participated in major redistricting, voting rights, and campaign finance cases before the U.S. Supreme Court as well as other federal and state court cases. Our work promotes every citizen’s right to participate in the democratic process.  

 This Proposed Regulation builds on Virginia’s commitment to adopting Ranked Choice Voting (“RCV”). Last year, the Virginia General Assembly approved a new law giving localities the option to pilot ranked choice voting. The proposed regulation, with the suggested changes from Chris Hughes at the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center, would establish clear standards for administering RCV in the state as part of this program.  

 RCV will provide numerous benefits to voters. Under the proposal, voters will have more choice and a greater number of candidates who are responsive to voter concerns. Localities can also significantly reduce their election costs by eliminating the need for a runoff when no candidate captures more than 50% of the vote. RCV was used by 22 jurisdictions in their most recent elections, and 53 jurisdictions are projected to use RCV in their next election or the one following.  

CLC urges the Department of Elections to expand Section 80 of the Proposed Regulation to ensure that voters are appropriately informed about RCV ahead of any election where RCV will be used. In the interests of voter education, we recommend the final rule more clearly direct localities on the dissemination of education information about RCV. To ensure that information is distributed in a timely manner, educational materials should be provided no more than 60 days before the specified election. The information should be disseminated publicly through circulation in the local newspaper, posted on the locality’s website, or mailed to active and inactive voters eligible to vote in the election. The Department of Education should also consider encouraging more than one distribution method to ensure that all voters have access to the materials.  

Additional means of distributing information that are both simple and cost-effective should also be considered. For instance, residents of Las Cruces, New Mexico, where RCV was recently adopted, receive a mock ballot that allows them to rank preferences for lunch options ahead of an election. Alternative distribution measures may include, but are not limited to, disseminating mock ballots through existing community-wide mailings, such as utility bills, and publicizing education information in public places, such as libraries and motor-vehicle offices, and through public broadcasting media and online sources, including non-English-speaking outlets, as applicable. 

Education and outreach materials should also be made available in multiple languages when necessary as required by Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-128. This statute models, and strengthens, the language minority protections outlined in Section 203 of the federal Voting Rights Act. This will enable more eligible voters in Virginia to have working knowledge of RCV ahead of a formal vote.