Comparative Structural Reform Partnering with 13 leading scholarly authorities on electoral reform and legislative functionality, FairVote conducted an in-depth assessment of 37 different structural reforms. Each scholar assessed the impact of each reform on 16 different criteria to assess how it would impact legislative functionality, electoral accountability, voter engagement, and openness of process. The reform at the heart of the Fair Representation Act, ranked choice voting in five-winner districts, was assessed to be the most impactful.
Representation 2020 Representation 2020 works to raise awareness of the under-representation of women in elected office, to strengthen coalitions that are supportive of measures to increase women's representation, and to highlight the often-overlooked structural barriers to achieving gender parity in American elections. Women win more seats with multi-winner districts and with fair representation voting.
Fair Representation Voting in the United States Alternatives to winner-take-all voting have a long tradition in the United States, with over 200 jurisdictions currently using ranked choice voting, cumulative voting, or limited voting to promote fair representation today. In 1870, Illinois adopted cumulative voting in three-winner districts for its state house of representatives, which it retained until 1980. In the first half of the 20th century, two-dozen U.S. cities adopted multi-winner ranked choice voting to elect their city councils, with Cambridge (MA) still using it to this day. Pennsylvania and Connecticut use "limited voting" and "limited nominations" to ensure minority representation in their local offices. Over 100 local jurisdictions have adopted limited voting or cumulative voting to remedy violations of the Voting Rights Act and adopt a more inclusive process.