15 Reasons Why the Time Is Right for Ranked Choice Voting in Waltham

The Strong Case for Waltham Ranked Choice Voting — Now

"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now." — Chinese proverb

Every proposal for improving government eventually encounters the same objection: "I like what you are proposing but this isn't the right time." That response is understandable—but in the case of Ranked Choice Voting, waiting won't make the conversation any easier or the benefits any greater. Here are fifteen reasons why now is exactly the ideal time for Waltham to consider Ranked Choice Voting.

1. Waltham's elections already have the conditions where RCV works best.

RCV isn't a solution looking for a problem. It is particularly well suited to nonpartisan elections with multiple candidates, where vote-splitting and preliminary elections are more likely to occur. That's exactly how many Waltham elections already work. This isn't about preparing for some future election system—it's about improving the one Waltham already has.

2. Waltham can eliminate unnecessary preliminary elections.

This is probably the strongest practical argument. When many candidates run for one office, Waltham may need a preliminary election simply to narrow the field.

That means:

• another election to administer

• another election to pay for

• another election with extremely low turnout

• another campaign season

RCV accomplishes the same objective with one election. Why continue holding two elections if one election can produce the same result?

3. Public frustration with politics is high.

Regardless of political affiliation, Americans consistently express concerns about:

• polarization

• negative campaigning

• strategic voting

• feeling forced to choose the "lesser of two evils"

While RCV doesn't solve all of those problems, it directly addresses one of them: It lets people vote for their favorite candidate without worrying they're helping elect their least favorite candidate. That is a reform people can understand immediately.

4. Trust in elections is under intense scrutiny.

Election administration is receiving more attention than at almost any time in modern history. People are asking:

• Are elections fair?

• Do winners really represent voters?

• Can we improve confidence?

RCV is part of a broader national conversation about improving election systems—not because elections are broken, but because election rules can and should evolve over time. States continue to debate changes ranging from voter eligibility rules to election administration and alternative voting systems.

5. Waltham doesn't have to wait for Washington.

One of the nice things about municipal election reform is that it isn't dependent on Congress solving national political problems. Whatever happens nationally, Waltham residents still deserve the best local election system possible. Local government should solve local problems.

6. Waiting never makes election reform easier.

History shows election reforms almost always happen between major controversies—not after everyone agrees. If we wait until after the next Waltham election, or the midterms, or the next  presidential election, or the next controversy, there will simply be another reason to delay.

Election reform is always competing with something else.

7. Communities should evaluate reforms before they need them.

Nobody wants to redesign election rules immediately before a hotly contested election. The best time to discuss improvements is when people have time to think carefully rather than reacting to a particular candidate or campaign. Election rules should be evaluated thoughtfully—not rewritten in the middle of controversy. That's why the best time to consider RCV is before a contentious election, not after one.

8. Waltham already educates voters on new voting procedures.

Some people worry about learning RCV. But Massachusetts voters have successfully adapted to:

• early voting

• vote-by-mail expansion

• electronic poll books

• new ballot layouts

Election officials routinely educate voters when procedures change. 

Adding rankings to a ballot is another educational effort—not an unprecedented challenge. If Waltham ever adopts RCV, voter education will be essential. Beginning that conversation now gives the city plenty of time to educate voters well before implementation.

9. Younger voters expect more choice.

Many younger voters dislike feeling forced into strategic voting. RCV matches the way many people naturally make decisions:

Here's my first choice.
If that doesn't work, here's my second choice.

That's how people choose colleges, restaurants, job applicants, fantasy sports drafts—even music playlists. Ranking preferences feels intuitive to many voters.

10. Waltham has the engaged civic community needed for thoughtful election reform.

Waltham's community-oriented infrastructure includes these stakeholders and institutions:

• neighborhood associations

• civic organizations

• active local media

• universities

• politically-engaged residents

This is exactly the type of civic ecosystem for an informed discussion about election reform.

11. RCV rewards coalition-building.

Today's political climate rewards energizing your own supporters. RCV adds another important incentive for candidates:

Can I also become acceptable to voters who prefer someone else?

Candidates don't have to agree with everyone. But with RCV they have a reason to avoid unnecessarily alienating large groups of voters. That incentive exists whether the race is partisan or nonpartisan.

12. National debate and the expanding acceptance of RCV across the country makes this the right time—not the wrong time.

The response to the statement that "Other states are now banning RCV" is:

Exactly. Election reform is being debated across the country. That's why Waltham should have its own conversation rather than letting other states decide what works best here.

The national picture is mixed. Some states have embraced Ranked Choice Voting, while others have prohibited it. That isn't a reason for Waltham to avoid the discussion. It's a reason to evaluate the issue carefully and decide what works best for our own community.

13. Democracy should continue improving.

Nobody argues we should stop improving:

• roads

• schools

• parks

• public safety

Election systems should also improve as better approaches become available. Our current system wasn't handed down unchanged from the founding:

• women gained the right to vote

• the voting age was lowered to 18

• direct election of U.S. senators replaced legislative selection

• absentee voting, early voting, and vote-by-mail expanded over time

Democracy has always evolved. Election systems should continue evolving whenever we discover better ways to represent voters.

14. Massachusetts is uniquely positioned.

Massachusetts isn't experimenting with something unfamiliar.

The Commonwealth has decades of experience with ranked-choice voting in municipal elections in Cambridge, giving election officials and voters an in-state example to study. At the same time, statewide adoption would require changes in state law because Massachusetts municipalities cannot generally adopt RCV on their own without legislative authorization.

15. Every election without RCV is missed opportunity.

Every election held without RCV is another election where:

• some voters vote strategically instead of honestly

• vote-splitting can affect outcomes

• candidates focus on finishing first rather than building broader consensus

• preliminary elections may be needed

If those are problems worth solving, postponing the discussion simply postpones the benefits.

In conclusion, now is exactly the right moment to bring RCV to Waltham. We already have competitive, nonpartisan local elections with multiple candidates—the kind of elections RCV is designed for. Across the country, communities are actively debating how elections should work, and that's precisely when local residents should evaluate whether there's a better way to elect their own city officials. The question isn't whether Waltham's election system will ever change. Every election system changes over time. The real question is whether Waltham is willing to consider improvements when the opportunity is in front of us. If Ranked Choice Voting can produce broader support, eliminate unnecessary preliminary elections, and give voters more freedom to vote honestly, then now is exactly the right time to have that conversation.