Abstract
Maine recently became the first state to implement instant-runoff voting, or ranked choice voting (RCV) in U.S. Senate and House elections. Before a court ruling, the state also successfully conducted RCV primary elections for governor in the summer of 2018. With seven candidates vying for the nomination, and as the first time voters in the state would try RCV, this race offered an opportunity to examine voting behavior to see how voters acted in a new electoral system.
This paper explores three areas of RCV voting through the analysis of Maine’s 2018 gubernatorial primary. First, this paper offers a descriptive analysis of the ballots cast in the primary, examining various voting propensities and patterns. Second, the paper attempts to address questions about the confusing nature of RCV by looking broadly at ballot errors. Third, the paper addresses the criticism that RCV does not always guarantee majority winners by examining ballot exhaustion in close detail. As the extant literature on RCV has looked at many of these areas separately, it is worthwhile to examine Maine in a broad context rather than through reexaminations of any one single avenue. Using this method, we can see how the inclusion of new data from Maine might bolster or weaken current arguments about RCV. In sum, voting behavior in Maine seems to be in line with many other studies. Rates of single-shot voting seem to be lower than reported in other locations, suggesting more participation in ranking, but the rate of completely ranked ballots was also lower, likely due to the large number of rankings allowed. Error rates seemed to be in line with other studies, but we find that the actual effect of any ballot errors was minimal. Finally, the number of completely blank ballots was at the low end of one study, but it is difficult to find comparable data. These blank ballots should be the subject of additional study.