Communist Influence Raises Concerns About Ranked-Choice Voting

The endorsement of ranked-choice voting (RCV) by members of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) has reignited debates about the system’s integrity and susceptibility to manipulation. Drew Bradley and Ryan Krueger, in their recent op-ed, advocated for RCV as a tool to advance communist candidates and sideline conservative opponents, prompting concerns about the system’s potential to undermine democratic norms.

RCV, also known as “rigged-choice voting,” allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, with the last-place finisher eliminated and their votes reallocated until one candidate secures a majority. While proponents tout RCV as a means to promote voter choice and reduce polarization, critics warn that it may be exploited to subvert electoral outcomes and advance fringe political agendas.

Bradley and Krueger’s endorsement of RCV reflects the CPUSA’s interest in using the system to challenge the dominance of mainstream political parties and promote communist candidates. They argue that RCV offers a pathway for “working class mass organizations” to support candidates aligned with their objectives, potentially reshaping the political landscape.

However, critics view the CPUSA’s embrace of RCV as part of a broader strategy to undermine democratic institutions and promote radical ideologies. They caution that RCV could be manipulated to benefit extremist groups like the CPUSA, eroding public trust in the electoral process and fostering political instability.

The CPUSA’s endorsement of RCV has raised concerns about its potential impact on election outcomes and democratic governance. Instances where RCV has favored establishment candidates over grassroots challengers, as observed in Alaska and Maine, fuel skepticism about the system’s fairness and transparency.

Ken Cuccinelli, national chairman of the Election Transparency Initiative, has called for greater vigilance in safeguarding against the infiltration of RCV into electoral systems. He warns that allowing RCV to proliferate could empower fringe groups like the CPUSA to exert undue influence over elections, undermining the principles of democracy and accountability.

In response to these concerns, several states, including Alabama, Oklahoma and Kentucky, have taken steps to prohibit the use of RCV in their elections. Critics argue that such measures are essential to preserving the integrity of the electoral process and upholding democratic values in the face of external threats.