An incumbent Congressman filed a federal lawsuit after losing a race in the November 2018 midterm elections and speaking out against the system of ranked choice voting publicly. However, neither the U.S. Constitution nor the Voting Rights Act precludes ranked choice voting. Instead of burdening the right to vote, ranked choice voting expands the right to vote by permitting voters to express preferences for more than a single candidate and to ensure their opportunity to have their voice considered in determining the ultimate winner. Additionally, if voters choose not to rank candidates, they can choose one candidate, and their ballot will still count.

On November 28, 2018, CLC filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine in support of Maine’s system of ranked choice voting. The case will be heard on December 5, 2018.

Why Ranked Choice Voting?

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution specifically empowered states to determine the procedures for electing members of Congress.

Voters in Maine strongly support ranked choice voting because it creates a more fair and democratic voting method, requiring candidates to cross the 50 percent voting threshold. More than 60 percent of those surveyed in an exit poll indicating they wanted to keep or even expanded its use to include state races. An even larger majority, just over 62 percent, named majority rule as an important or “very important” priority for election outcomes.

This affirmation underscores the growing support for ranked choice voting, which Maine voters first approved in a 2016 ballot measure and then again in the 2018 primary by an even higher margin.

The system used in most elections, a “traditional plurality voting system” incentivizes candidates to boost their support among their base, while failing to ensure they represent a majority of the voters in their district. Candidates have clear incentives to disregard independent and third-party candidates (and their supporters) who will not garner enough votes to pose a threat. Voters often feel they cannot vote for alternatives to the major party candidates, lest they play the role of “spoiler.”

Ranked choice voting presents an appealing alternative, and Maine is leading the way in enacting it. Ranked choice voting fosters more choice, more competition, and a greater need for cooperation because each candidate must seek the support of a wider range of the electorate. Because candidates must win majority support, ranked choice voting requires candidates to reach out to a broad coalition of voters – causing them to be more likely to engage with voters directly. This kind of system is ultimately more democratic and more majoritarian than traditional plurality voting.

Secretary Ross’s vague, incomplete, and inconsistent public financial disclosures buttress the public’s concern about whether the financial interests of a particularly wealthy cabinet secretary influenced administration policies affecting American companies.

In August 2018, CLC’s ethics team reviewed Ross’s public financial records and determined that there was enough evidence for the Inspector General to investigate Ross for failing to recuse from matters affecting his financial interests and making false statements. This led to a 115-page report that CLC submitted to the Inspector General.

Details in the report CLC compiled show that in 2017, Ross led an investigation to determine whether the United States should impose a tariff on steel imports while holding Invesco stock worth millions. At the time, Invesco had a significant interest in Chinese steel through a subsidiary that Ross ran until he joined the government. While leading the steel investigation, Ross also held stock in a steel-dependent railcar manufacturer named Greenbrier. One day after Greenbrier CEO Mark Furman sent a letter to the Commerce Department expressing concern about the investigation’s effect on his company, Ross sold up to a half million dollars’ worth of Greenbrier stock. Ross, who sold Greenbrier stock three times in 2017, claims that these sales occurred after he had unexpectedly discovered he still held shares of the company’s stock. However, Ross does not appear to have recused from the steel investigation after each discovery pending divestiture of the shares.

Additionally, according to reporting by Forbes, Ross hosted Chevron’s then-CEO John Watson, along with two company lobbyists, in his conference room on March 22, 2017 to discuss oil and gas developments, tax reform and trade issues. Ross’s wife owned a stake in the company worth more than $250,000. This caused CLC to file a supplemental complaint on November 1, 2018 because federal law prohibits officials from taking actions that have a predictable and direct effect on financial interests held by them or their spouses.

As CLC ethics counsel Delaney Marsco has said, the American people have entrusted Ross with power and authority so he can ensure the welfare of the American economy. We should not have to wonder if he's making decisions for the benefit of the public or for his own pocketbook.