Wyoming lawmakers successfully passed HB165 – Ranked Choice Voting-Prohibition during the 2025 legislative session. The bill reaffirms Wyoming’s commitment to clear, transparent, and fair elections.
At its core, HB165 ensures that every Wyomingite retains the right to vote for one candidate who best represents their values, without interference or confusion caused by Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) systems. This law makes it clear that no election in Wyoming may be conducted using Ranked Choice Voting, and that any attempt by counties, municipalities, or other governmental bodies to implement RCV is invalid and void under state law.
But what is Ranked Choice Voting, and why has it become a controversial issue across the country?
What is Ranked Choice Voting?
Ranked Choice Voting is a method of casting and counting votes where voters rank candidates in order of preference (first, second, third, etc.). If no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed to voters’ next choices. This process continues through multiple rounds until a winner emerges.
RCV is currently used in some cities and states, mostly in progressive-leaning areas. However, it’s been rejected or banned in over a dozen conservative states, including Idaho, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Missouri, South Dakota, Montana, and Arizona—many of which cite transparency, fairness, and voter trust as key reasons for opposing it. After successfully banning RCV in Alabama, Secretary of State Wes Allen said, “Elections conducted using ranked choice voting violate the fundamental principle of ‘one-person one-vote.” He further explained this system is known to cause voter confusion, large percentages of spoiled ballots, and excessively delayed election results.”
Why Wyoming Said “No” to Ranked Choice Voting
While RCV is often promoted as a “modern” or “innovative” alternative to traditional voting systems, real-world experiences in cities and states where it has been implemented tell a different story. Far from improving the democratic process, RCV has introduced a host of problems that impact voters, complicate elections, and undermine trust in the outcomes.
Here are just a few of the most pressing concerns:
It Undermines the Principle of “One Person, One Vote”
In a traditional election, every voter casts a single vote, and the candidate with the most votes wins. It’s simple, fair, and straightforward. But Ranked Choice Voting changes that.
In RCV, some voters end up having their votes counted in multiple rounds, while others may only have their vote counted once. This happens because, as candidates are eliminated in successive rounds, the votes of those who ranked additional candidates continue to be redistributed, while the votes of those who didn’t rank remaining candidates are essentially ignored. This violates the long-held American principle that each person gets one equal vote—and only one.
It Leads to “Exhausted” Ballots
A significant issue with RCV is the concept of “exhausted” ballots—votes that don’t count in the final round of tallying. This can happen for several reasons:
- A voter only ranked one or two candidates, and both were eliminated in early rounds.
- The voter skipped rankings or made errors on their ballot.
- The voter misunderstood how to rank, resulting in an overvote or undervote.
In any of these scenarios, the ballot becomes “exhausted” and is not included in the final result. That means some voices are simply silenced before a winner is declared. In one San Francisco election, RCV led to nearly 10,000 ballots being discarded over 20 rounds of counting. That’s not voter empowerment—that’s voter elimination.
It Creates Confusion for Voters
The RCV system is complex, even for politically active and informed citizens. It asks voters not just to pick the candidate they support, but to rank multiple candidates in order of preference— even those they know little or nothing about.
This complexity results in a much higher rate of voter error. People may accidentally skip rankings, assign the same rank to multiple candidates, or misunderstand how the process works. A Rasmussen poll in 2023 found that only 32% of voters believe RCV is a more fair system than traditional voting—suggesting widespread confusion and skepticism. Studies also show that this confusion is even more pronounced among senior citizens, non-native English speakers, and first-time voters—the very groups we should be working to empower and include.
It Delays Election Results
In most traditional elections, results are known on election night, or within a day. With RCV, results are often delayed for several days or even weeks as officials go through multiple rounds of tabulation, redistributing and recounting votes in each round.
In a 2022 special election held in Alaska, it took over 2 weeks for a winner to be declared. This delay was due to the time required to count absentee ballots and conduct multiple rounds of tabulation inherent in the RCV process
This delay undermines voter confidence in the process and increases the risk of disputes, misreporting, and public mistrust, particularly in close or contentious races. At a time when Americans are already concerned about election integrity, introducing a system that drags out results and complicates verification is a step in the wrong direction.
It Creates Overwhelming Ballots
One of the lesser-discussed consequences of RCV is the sheer volume of information voters must process. With RCV encouraging larger fields of candidates, voters may be asked to rank a dozen or more individuals for a single office.
This means a responsible voter would need to research each candidate’s background, platform, and qualifications just to cast an informed ballot. That level of homework might be manageable in one race, but not across a full ballot with multiple offices up for election. Many voters end up guessing or skipping rankings entirely, increasing the number of exhausted or incorrectly completed ballots.
The Bigger Picture
Ranked Choice Voting may be gaining traction in progressive states, but the push to implement it nationwide is heavily funded—over $150 million was spent between 2022 and 2024 alone to promote the system. While it’s often packaged as “progress,” in practice, RCV introduces confusion, uncertainty, and unequal representation into our elections. That’s why conservative states across the country—including Wyoming—are choosing to reject it. With the passage of HB165, Wyoming has taken a firm stand for clear, constitutional, and trustworthy elections, keeping our voting process simple, secure, and exactly what voters expect and deserve.