Unfortunately, to replace single-seat districts with multi-seat super districts at the Congressional level will require an act of Congress - repeal of the 1967 Single-Member District Mandate. However, states could lead by example by implementing proportional ranked choice voting in multi-seat state level districts. In my opinion there are only two valid criticisms of proportional RCV multi-seat districts. The first is with open primaries there are just too many candidates to accurately rank. If there are seven seats in a district and five candidates for each seat, then there would thirty-five candidates to rank. A typical voter identifies two or three preferred candidates and a couple undesirable candidates. For multi-seat districts, Score Then Automatic Runoff (STAR) would be superior to RCV. The second criticism of multi-seat districts is that a majority of winners could be in close proximity geographically and have too much influence in the district.
Unfortunately, to replace single-seat districts with multi-seat super districts at the Congressional level will require an act of Congress - repeal of the 1967 Single-Member District Mandate. However, states could lead by example by implementing proportional ranked choice voting in multi-seat state level districts. In my opinion there are only two valid criticisms of proportional RCV multi-seat districts. The first is with open primaries there are just too many candidates to accurately rank. If there are seven seats in a district and five candidates for each seat, then there would thirty-five candidates to rank. A typical voter identifies two or three preferred candidates and a couple undesirable candidates. For multi-seat districts, Score Then Automatic Runoff (STAR) would be superior to RCV. The second criticism of multi-seat districts is that a majority of winners could be in close proximity geographically and have too much influence in the district.