Federal Mandate Requires Ranked Choice Voting for Congress by 2030, Bans All Runoff Elections

This proposed Ranked Choice Voting Act is a major policy shift that would completely change how we elect every U.S. Senator and Representative. Starting in 2030, every state would be forced to ditch the current system and use Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for all federal primaries, specials, and general elections. The core idea is simple: instead of picking just one candidate, you rank them 1, 2, 3, and so on. The bill lays out the exact rules for how those rankings must be counted until one candidate has a majority, asserting that Congress has the constitutional right to set these rules.

No More Runoffs, Just Rankings

One of the biggest real-world changes here is the outright ban on separate runoff elections. Think about those low-turnout, expensive second elections that often happen a month after the primary or general election. The bill states that states cannot hold a separate runoff primary or general election after the scheduled date. This means that if you live in a state that currently uses runoffs (like Georgia or Louisiana), the winner will be determined on Election Day through the RCV tabulation process. This could save states administrative headaches and money, and save you a second trip to the polls.

For the voter, the ballot requirements are specific. States must design ballots that allow you to rank candidates, and you must be allowed to rank at least five candidates, or all of them if there are fewer than five. For anyone new to RCV, this means a learning curve. If you’re used to just ticking one box, you’ll need to understand how your second and third choices come into play, especially since the bill requires that if you skip a ranking or rank the same candidate twice, your ballot still remains active for your highest-ranked choice.

The Cost of Compliance: Federal Cash Meets State Mandates

Mandating a new voting system across 50 states is expensive. To help ease the pain, the bill authorizes the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to provide a one-time payment to each state by June 1, 2026. This funding is calculated based on the number of registered voters, with the EAC setting a per capita amount between $4 and $8. The money is specifically earmarked for things like updating voting equipment, printing new ballots, and, critically, voter education and poll worker training.

While federal funding is offered, state and local election administrators will bear the brunt of the implementation. They have to overhaul their entire system—from hardware to training—to meet the 2030 deadline. If the federal payment isn’t enough to cover the actual costs, taxpayers in those states will likely pick up the difference. This is a massive shift in how elections are run, and it puts the burden of executing the change squarely on local election offices.

Enforcement: The Lawyers Get Involved

If a state drags its feet or fails to implement RCV correctly, the bill creates two pathways for enforcement. First, the U.S. Attorney General can sue the state. Second, any private citizen who feels harmed by the state’s non-compliance can also file a civil lawsuit. These cases would be handled by special three-judge panels in federal district courts and are designed to be fast-tracked, with appeals going straight to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

What does this mean for the average person? It means that compliance is non-negotiable, and the threat of litigation is real. While citizens can’t win monetary damages, the court is required to award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing party. This provision essentially incentivizes watchdogs and legal groups to monitor state compliance closely, ensuring the federal mandate is followed to the letter, but also potentially leading to a lot of legal wrangling over election procedures.