Get the truth about Idaho’s Proposition 1: Open Primaries & Ranked Choice Voting
Claim: Prop 1 is too expensive
The Fact:
Critics claim Prop 1 will cost over $40 million due to equipment changes, but Idaho’s closed primary system, in place since 2011, costs voters over $3 million annually. This burden is far higher than the projected costs of implementing Prop 1. Moreover, states like Utah, a deeply conservative state that uses RCV, have successfully transitioned without excessive costs. Prop 1 is a smart investment in modernizing Idaho’s elections, ensuring transparency and fairness for voters. The projected costs are manageable and worth the benefits of a more inclusive election system.
In addition, moving to a more efficient, open election system could save money by reducing the need for expensive runoff elections. Prop 1 would eliminate unnecessary costs by consolidating elections into one round, where voters can rank their choices instead of going to the polls multiple times. Overall, Prop 1’s long-term savings outweigh the initial costs, and Idaho’s taxpayers will benefit from a streamlined, transparent system.
Claim: Prop 1 is too complicated
The Fact:
The claim that Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) is too complicated is simply false. RCV is as easy to understand as ranking teams in a sports bracket. If voters can fill out a March Madness bracket or rank their favorite movies, they can easily grasp RCV. Voters rank candidates in order of preference, and if their top choice is eliminated, their vote transfers to their next choice. This ensures that every vote counts and gives voters more say in the outcome.
In fact, states like Maine and Utah have implemented RCV without confusion. Voters in these states quickly adapted to the system, finding it intuitive and straightforward. Opponents want to make you believe you’re “too dumb” to understand RCV, but if you can rank a few candidates, you can handle this system. Far from complicating things, RCV ensures that voters get more voice and choice in their elections.
Claim: RCV eliminates one person, one vote
The Fact:
RCV actually enhances the concept of “one person, one vote.” Every voter gets a single vote, but RCV allows that vote to transfer if their first-choice candidate is eliminated. This ensures that no votes are wasted and that the most broadly supported candidate wins. Instead of your vote being wasted on a losing candidate, RCV keeps your vote in play.
For example, if you vote for Candidate A but they don’t make it past the first round, your vote will transfer to your second choice, Candidate B. This makes sure that your preferences still matter and ensures that the final elected candidate has broader support from voters. RCV doesn’t take away your vote—it makes it more powerful by ensuring it counts even if your top candidate doesn’t win.
Claim: Prop 1 is a liberal plot to turn Idaho blue
The Fact:
The idea that Prop 1 is a plot to “turn Idaho blue” is nothing more than fear-mongering. States like Utah, a Republican stronghold, have implemented RCV without shifting politically. RCV doesn’t favor one party over another; it simply ensures that the most broadly supported candidates win, regardless of their political affiliation. In fact, many red states, including Alaska and Utah, use forms of open primaries or ranked-choice voting, and they remain red.
This claim also ignores the fact that Prop 1 promotes fairer, more transparent elections. Rather than allowing extreme factions to dominate the process, Prop 1 ensures that all voters have a voice, preventing small, radical groups from hijacking elections. Prop 1 isn’t about turning Idaho blue; it’s about making sure Idahoans have a fair, representative democracy.
Claim: RCV (Rigged Choice Voting) destroys paper ballots
The Fact:
This claim is outright false. RCV does not eliminate paper ballots. In fact, RCV ballots are still paper-based, and every vote can be hand-counted and audited. The ranking system in RCV is designed to be transparent and straightforward to audit. If you can count to four, you can easily audit an RCV election.
Maine, which uses RCV, regularly conducts hand-count audits with no issues. There’s no reason to believe Idaho would face any challenges in auditing RCV elections. Paper ballots remain intact, and every vote is counted just as transparently as it is in current elections.
Claim: RCV can’t be audited
The Fact:
RCV elections are fully auditable. Every vote is recorded as a paper ballot, and the ranking process makes it easy to trace how votes transfer from candidate to candidate. Maine and Utah, both of which use RCV, have conducted successful hand audits without any issues. RCV provides a clear paper trail that is just as transparent, if not more so, than traditional voting methods.
Opponents argue that RCV is too complex to audit, but that’s simply not true. In fact, RCV ballots are easier to verify because they include multiple rankings, offering a clear record of voter intent. With proper oversight, RCV elections are just as secure and auditable as traditional elections.
Claim: RCV destroyed Alaska’s GOP
The Fact:
The claim that RCV “destroyed” the GOP in Alaska is a gross misrepresentation. In reality, RCV in Alaska has made elections more competitive and ensured that candidates with broad appeal win. It hasn’t favored one party over another—it simply makes candidates work harder to win support across the political spectrum. Some Republicans lost, not because of RCV, but because they didn’t appeal to enough voters.
In Alaska, RCV ensures that the most broadly supported candidate wins. It didn’t destroy the GOP; instead, it encouraged candidates to focus on broader voter appeal. RCV in Idaho would similarly encourage candidates to appeal to a wider base, fostering healthier, more representative elections.
Claim: Prop 1 will Californicate Idaho
The Fact:
The claim that Prop 1 will turn Idaho into California is a baseless scare tactic. Prop 1 is designed to ensure that all Idaho voters have a fair voice in elections, regardless of party affiliation. It doesn’t push any particular ideology, and it certainly doesn’t introduce “California-style” politics into Idaho. Instead, Prop 1 promotes a more representative democracy by ensuring the most popular candidates advance to the general election.
Many conservative states, like Utah and Alaska, have implemented systems like RCV and open primaries without turning into “California.” These states have maintained their conservative values while ensuring fair and transparent elections for all voters. Prop 1 strengthens Idaho’s democracy, not undermines it.
Claim: Prop 1 disenfranchises voters
The Fact:
Prop 1 actually expands voter participation by allowing unaffiliated voters, who make up a significant portion of Idaho’s electorate, to fully participate in the election process. Under the current closed primary system, unaffiliated voters are shut out of critical primary elections. Prop 1 would allow them to vote in the primary and rank candidates in the general election, ensuring that all Idahoans have a voice.
By removing the closed primary system, Prop 1 ensures that voters from all political backgrounds can help choose the candidates that represent them in the general election. This doesn’t disenfranchise voters—it empowers them by making elections more inclusive and democratic.
Claim: RCV forces you to vote for Democrats, socialists, RINOs, and leftists
The Fact:
RCV doesn’t force you to vote for anyone you don’t want to. You can rank as many or as few candidates as you like, including just one if you prefer. If you don’t want to rank more than one candidate, that’s your choice. RCV simply gives you the option to express your preferences across multiple candidates.
This system gives voters more freedom, not less. You’re not forced to support candidates you disagree with, but RCV ensures that if your top choice loses, your vote still counts toward your second or third preference. This empowers voters by giving them more control over the outcome.
Claim: RCV ballots are spoiled
The Fact:
This claim is false. Under RCV, no ballots are "spoiled" or wasted. Every vote is counted, and if your top choice doesn’t make it, your vote moves to your next preferred candidate. This gives voters multiple chances to have their voice heard, ensuring that even if your first choice loses, your vote still counts in the final outcome.
RCV prevents the frustration of “wasting” your vote on a losing candidate. Your vote remains in play until a candidate with broad support wins. This makes elections more fair and ensures that all voices are heard, not just those backing the most popular candidates from the start.