The Maine Event? Mismatch between Expectations and Outcomes in Election Reform

• In Event: Classic Concepts Revisited

Abstract

In 2018, the State of Maine carried out the first ever statewide election using ranked-choice voting (RCV), which allows voters to rank candidates in their order of preference for each office. In the referendum to implement RCV in 2016 and the subsequent people’s veto referendum to overturn it in 2018, there were many claims made by proponents of the ballot change, many with little empirical backing due to the limited scope in which RCV has been used in the U.S. These claims include those around turnout, voter confidence, spoiled ballots and voter confusion, sincere voting, and partisan benefit. Were the elites that campaigned for RCV correct in their predictions, and are they actually able to perceive the impact of RCV? Is the average voter able to perceive the impact of RCV, and are they correct in their assumptions around the system? How does public opinion form around new and emerging election reform? In this study, I take a multi-pronged approach to answering these questions. First, I use matching, difference-in-differences, synthetic control, and randomization inference to uncover the causal effect of RCV on a variety of outcomes. Second, I pair this with a state-representative survey on opinion around ranked choice voting and perceptions around the voting system. Finally, I conduct a survey of Maine elites in order to uncover their predictions and current perceptions of the voting system in order to find the level of congruence between their perceptions and reality. In doing so, I am able to contribute to theoretical debates around political behavior, partisanship, and public opinion surrounding election reform in the United States.

Author

• Jesse Clark, Princeton University