Periscope: Why French Runoffs Work Better than American Ones
Proxy voting rules enable turnout boost, but RCV is a better bet in the USA
Last month, I wrote about how the French could improve their presidential runoffs by adoption of ranked choice voting (RCV) in a single election or, at a minimum, using RCV in the first round to ensure representative choices. While Emmanuel Macron has since won a convincing runoff landslide, the vote was much more a “no” against Marine Le Pen than a “yes” for the generally unpopular incumbent.
That said, it’s worth exploring why the French runoff system works better than American runoffs and Top 2 primary systems. The big difference is how France keeps generally constant voter turnout across the two rounds. As an example, here is France’s voter turnout and winning percentage in its last six presidential runoffs.
Year………….1st Round Turnout & Leader…..……2nd Round Turnout & Winner
2022………73.7%……….(Macron 27.8%)……………72.0%…..(Macron 58.5% over Le Pen)
2017………77.8%………(Macron 24.0%)…………….74.6%…..(Macron 66.1% over Le Pen
2012………..79.5%………(Hollande 28.6%)…………..80.3%….(Hollande 51.6% over Sarkozy)
2007………..83.8%………(Sarkozy 31.2%)…………….84.0%……(Sarkozy 53.1% over Royal)
2002………71.6%……..(Chirac 19.9%)………………..79.7%…..(Chirac 82.2% over Le Pen)
1995………78.4%……..(Jospin 23.3%)………………..79.7%…..(Chirac 52.6% over Jospin)
Average…..77.5%…..…(Leads with 25.8%)…………78.4%….(Wins with 60.7%)
Given the fractured results in the first round, these outcomes show the value of a majority system rather than the American lottery system of single-choice plurality. But note how France’s turnout patterns compare to what we generally see in the United States.
Our runoff elections typically follow one of two patterns, both of which are deeply affected by the fact that there is a big gap between the rounds of voting due to election administration challenges in the United States.:
A contingent runoff held after a general election, like in France
A preliminary round that winnows the field to two before the general election.
The first approach generally results in lower turnout in the runoff. The second always results in lower turnout in the preliminary round that often effectively decides the outcome based on which two candidates advance.
A key difference between the US and France is that France’s presidential runoff takes place only two weeks after the first round - and its upcoming parliamentary runoffs will be only a week after the first election.
Our Super Bowl is also just two weeks after the conference playoffs and has the highest television audience in sports. Imagine if we instead waited two months – fan interest would sharply decline. But that’s exactly how we do it in our elections.
Turnout Decline in American General Election Runoffs
Post-general election runoffs are relatively rare in the United States because, well, who wants to have a runoff election in the holidays? Certainly not most voters. States that do sometimes have such runoffs include Louisiana (with its novel system where its first round for US Senate and US House elections is in November, and contingent runoffs take place in December), Mississippi for some of its statewide offices like governor, and Georgia for all its statewide offices. Some cities also have mayoral runoffs after a November election.
Voter turnout in such runoffs nearly always drops like a rock. Consider Georgia’s statewide runoffs over the past 20 years. The only runoff that came anywhere close to matching the first round was the recent US Senate runoffs that effectively decided control of the entire US Senate. The rest dropped sharply — and yes, those single digit turnouts in 2004 and 2006 are not typos.
Georgia
Year…………..General Election Turnout……..Statewide Runoff Turnout
2020…………….67.7%………………………………………..60.7% (US Senate)
2018…………….54.1%………………………………………..20.2% (Sec. of State)
2008…………….62.5%………………………………………..34.0% (US Senate)
2006…………….34.7%…………………………………………3.5% (PSC)
2004…………….56.1%…………………………………….…..4.2% (Court of Appeals)
Average…..….55.0%…………………………………..….24.5%
The power of the office up for grabs can affect runoff turnout, but it’s more than that. Congressional elections obviously matter, but turnout disparities in federal primary runoffs are breathtaking. FairVote has found that voter turnout declined between the first round and the runoff in 240 (97%) of the 248 regularly scheduled primary runoffs in the U.S House and U.S. Senate from 1994 to 2020. The average decline in turnout was 38%.
Turnout Disparities in 1st Round of Top 2 Systems
A more common approach in cities seeks to ensure higher turnout in the decisive vote, but does so at the expense of a generally much lower turnout in a preliminary round that reduces the field to two - and often leaving voters with a clearly decided outcome between a strong and weak candidate or with an unrepresentative field with only one party’s candidates to choose between.
At the federal and statewide election level, California adopted a “Top 2” system in 2010 and started using it in 2012. Washington started using its top 2 system in 2008. Here is data from all their elections with the top 2 systems
Year/State………...Primary Turnout………General Election Turnout
2020 CA……………..37.7%………………………...68.5%
2018 CA……………..28.0%………………………...48.6%
2016 CA……………..33.5%………………………...58.2%
2014 CA……………..18.4%………………………...30.9%
2012 CA……………...22.1%………………………...53.4%
2020 WA……………..46.2%………………………...75.7%
2018 WA……………..32.7%………………………...58.3%
2016 WA……………..27.9%………………………...65.7%
2014 WA……………..24.8%………………………...43.1%
2012 WA……………..29.8%………………………...65.8%
2010 WA……………..31.2%………………………...54.3%
2008 WA……………..31.9%………………………...67.3%
Average…………..…30.4%…………..……………57.5%
Turnout in the general election is nearly double the preliminary round, and typically is far more representative of the electorate. Such turnout disparities can be even bigger in the many cities that use this system – like every city in Utah except those that have started to use a single round with ranked choice voting.
How France Does it: The Proxy Vote
So how does France have runoff elections so close to the first round? As explained by the Associated Press, France has very “old school” approaches to voting. In 1975, they banned all absentee voting, even from people living overseas or homebound for health reasons. This obviously deprives many voters from a chance to cast their own ballot, but what France offers in its place is the chance for people to vote by “proxy” - to delegate another voter with the ballot vote on their behalf. About 7% of votes in 2017 were cast this way. As a result, all votes are cast in person, and with nothing else on the ballot, can be counted quickly — in turn allowing a runoff to be held very quickly, with administrative needs limited to printing and distributing new ballots and having poll workers lined up for the runoff.
France banned absentee ballot out of concerns of fraud, but we’re legally and morally bound to allow people to vote by mail who can’t vote in person. The United States in 2020 had its highest-ever voter turnout as a share of its adult population in the middle of a global pandemic only because it allowed people to vote at home. And it’s hard to imagine the Americans skeptical of voting at home to be willing to accept a proxy vote system.
Ranked Choice Voting is the Common Sense Solution
As is so often the case, offering a ranked choice voting ballot is the commonsense solution. Nothing is perfect in the election world, but RCV offers a simple tool that is increasingly common and proven to improve the American system for its voters, including in comparison to runoffs in preserving turnout. For example:
RCV is better and more representative than single-choice plurality in both primaries and general elections, as Maine shows for its congressional elections.
RCV can allow cities and states to avoid the problems coming both with runoffs and with split votes in one election, as more than 50 cities now do.
For jurisdictions wanting to keep two rounds of voting, RCV can be used in the first round to ensure a more representative choice and, even more importantly, can be used in general elections that are open to more than two candidates, as being pioneered this year in Alaska.
Let’s keep our eyes on the world and our own laboratories of democracy for what works — and how to adapt it to our needs to make it better.
Sources: Wikipedia for French presidential elections and a combination of the United States Election Project, California for Inclusive Democracy, France and official results pages from Georgia and Washington for American election data.
Rob Richie @Rob_Richie
Periscope: Why French Runoffs Work Better than American Ones
I oppose the top two primary election process as implemented by California and Washington. The general election should have a diversity of candidates. California registered voters are 46.1% Democrats, 24.2% Republicans and 24% no party preference. Washington residents voted 58.0% Democrat, 38.8% Republican and 3.3% other. Neither state primary utilizes RCV. The two top vote getters that advance to the general election can easily both be Democrats.