The Ohio Senate voted Wednesday to prohibit ranked choice voting in statewide elections and withhold state funding for governments that try it at the local level. The bill now heads to Gov. Mike DeWine, who spoke favorably of the ban idea when asked about it earlier this week.

It’s the second time the Senate has voted on the idea. And although two Democrats went from “yea” to “nay” this time around, the measure’s passage was never really in doubt. It passed easily, 24 to 7.

DeWine pointed, as many other lawmakers have, to examples of ranked choice tabulation taking days or even weeks.

“You know, one of the things in our system is you have to have fairly quick counts, or the public becomes really concerned about it,” DeWine said.

“It’s also, I think, if you talk to election officials, it’s a very cumbersome thing. So, you know, I’m going to look at it, but I think there’s some pretty good arguments.”

Meanwhile, ranked choice supporters argue that those delays stem from state policies that allow time for absentee ballots to arrive — not the actual tabulation of votes.

Notably, Ohio just eliminated its four-day absentee ballot grace period.

Rank the Vote Ohio Executive Director Denise Riley warned last month that threatening local governments’ funding amounts to “straight up coercion,” and “stands little chance of holding up in court.”

Floor debate

Ohio Senate Bill 63 co-sponsor Ohio state Sen. Theresa Gavarone, R-Bowling Green, dismissed ranked choice voting as “a confusing and disastrous voting method.”

“(It) would continuously eliminate candidates in a series of rounds until one candidate wins a majority, 50% plus one vote,” she said. “Under this election method, voters rank candidates in order of their personal preference, instead of choosing just one.”

Backers claim that by allowing voters to express multiple preferences, more politicians will see a path to winning, and voters will get to choose among a broader array of candidates.

And, in theory, if it’s still valuable to be a voter’s second, third, or fourth choice, candidates who appeal broadly are likely to be more successful than those who focus on a partisan base.

Although he voted in favor of S.B. 63, Ohio state Sen. Bill Blessing, R-Colerain Twp., said ranked choice supporters have a point.

“The incentives in our current system reward partisanship,” he said, and there’s evidence ranked choice could reduce that.

“Ranked choice voting is similar to a roundabout in that they’re both unfairly maligned and misunderstood,” Blessing said. “If the goal is traffic safety and efficiency, roundabouts win by a country mile. It’s not even debatable.”

Still, if reducing partisanship is the goal, Blessing thinks there’s an even simpler approach: the top-two or jungle primary.

In Ohio far more voters are unaffiliated instead of registered with a political party.

As of 2024, registered Republicans and Democrats combined — and then doubled — are still about a million voters shy of those in Ohio who are unaffiliated.

“A small fraction is choosing the candidates for everyone,” Blessing said. “Enfranchising all Ohio voters to choose the top two candidates who will face off against each other in November ensures that Republicans and Democrats have to appeal to more than just the most partisan elements of their respective parties.”

On S.B. 63’s second pass through the Senate, it carried a minor change from the House.

The provision makes it clear a candidate’s qualifying petitions are a public record.

The bill’s co-sponsor, Ohio state Sen. Bill DeMora, D-Columbus, said he was “shocked” to find out some counties didn’t already consider them public, and that the amendment, “I think, just made it better.”

Meanwhile two other Democrats changed their minds about the proposal.

Ohio state Sen. Catherine Ingram, D-Cincinnati, and Ohio Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio both voted against the measure, and Antonio took a moment to explain her change of heart.

“Before the bill left the Senate, I hadn’t really heard from anyone in my district about what they thought about ranked choice voting,” she said. “Since then, I have heard a lot.”

Since the bill first passed the Senate, she said she’s heard from constituents “loud and clear” that they want the opportunity to at least consider ranked choice voting for local elections.

“I believed when I first voted for the bill that Ohio wasn’t ready for this kind of approach,” Antonio said.

“My constituents are telling me they are ready for this kind of approach.”

Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.