OHIO LEGISLATIVE SERVICE COMMISSION
Office of Research Legislative Budget
www.lsc.ohio.gov and Drafting Office
H.B. 684 Bill Analysis
135th General Assembly
Click here for H.B. 684’s Fiscal Note
Version: As Introduced
Primary Sponsors: Reps. Wiggam and Swearingen
Effective date:
S. Ben Fogle, Attorney
SUMMARY
▪ Prohibits the use of ranked choice voting in any federal, state, or local election in Ohio.
DETAILED ANALYSIS
Ranked choice voting
The bill prohibits ranked choice voting from being used in determining the nomination or
election of any candidate for federal, state, or local office in Ohio.
The bill defines “ranked choice voting” as:
a voting method that allows electors to rank candidates for
nomination or election to an office in order of preference and has
ballots cast to be tabulated in multiple rounds following the
elimination of a candidate until a single candidate receives the
majority of the votes cast or until the number of candidates
nominated or elected equals the number of offices to be filled, as
applicable.1
Ranked choice voting also often is called “instant runoff voting.” It allows voters to rank
three or more candidates from most preferred to least preferred. Tabulation (vote counting)
proceeds in rounds – the number one choices counted in the first round – such that in each round,
one or more candidates are nominated or elected or a last-place candidate is defeated. In the
second round, defeated candidates are removed and the second choices are tabulated, and so
on. Votes are transferred from nominated, elected, or defeated candidates to the voter’s
next ranked candidate or candidates in order of preference. Tabulation ends when a candidate
1 R.C. 3501.41.
November 15, 2024
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
receives the majority of the votes cast or when the number of candidates nominated or elected
equals the number of offices to be filled, as applicable.
See “About ranked choice voting,” below for more information about this system,
including an example of a ranked-choice election. This analysis uses the term ranked choice
voting to include instant runoff voting.
Ranked choice voting in Ohio
Existing state law does not contemplate the use of ranked choice voting for any election.
The required ballot format and counting method under the Revised Code would not
accommodate ranked choice voting.2 However, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that a
municipal corporation or chartered county can use its home rule powers under the Ohio
Constitution to conduct municipal or county elections using ranked choice voting.3 It appears that
currently, no local government in Ohio uses ranked choice voting. But, five Ohio cities have used
ranked choice voting – then called proportional representation – for city council elections during
some period in the past: Ashtabula (1915-1929), Cleveland (1923-1931), Cincinnati (1925-1957),
Hamilton (1926-1960), and Toledo (1935-1949).4
Therefore, the bill may not be enforceable against municipal corporations and charter
counties. Under the Ohio Constitution, municipal corporations and charter counties have the
authority to exercise all powers of local self-government.5
The exact scope of “all powers of local self-government” has not been defined by the
courts, but cases have established standards for determining what the term includes. The Ohio
Supreme Court has stated that local self-government authority includes “such powers of
government as, in view of their nature and the field of their operation, are local and municipal in
character.”6 The Court also has stated that local self-government authority “relates solely to the
government and administration of the internal affairs of the municipality.”7
The Supreme Court has specifically found that municipal corporations may use their home
rule authority to conduct ranked choice voting.8
About ranked choice voting
Overview
Ranked choice voting is a method of holding an election that allows a voter to rank three
or more candidates on the ballot from favorite to least favorite. If the voter’s favorite candidate
2 R.C. 3505.03, 3505.04, 3505.10, 3505.27, 3505.33, 3513.12, 3513.14, and 3513.21, not in the bill.
3 State ex rel. Sherrill v. Brown, 155 Ohio St. 607 (1951).
4 Kathleen L. Barber, Proportional Representation and Election Reform in Ohio (Ohio State University Press
1995).
5 Ohio Constitution, Article XVIII, Section 3; art. X, sec. 3.
6 State ex rel. Toledo v. Lynch, 88 Ohio St. 71, 97 (1913).
7 Beachwood v. Bd. of Elections of Cuyahoga Cty., 167 Ohio St. 369, 371 (1958).
8 Supra, n. 3.
P a g e |2 H.B. 684
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
cannot win, the vote is then transferred to the voter’s next favored candidate. In a crowded field
of candidates, the total vote might be split several ways, with no candidate receiving a majority
vote. Ranked choice voting allows a single candidate to achieve a majority vote after multiple
rounds of counting by systematically eliminating the least popular candidates and reassigning
their votes to the remaining candidates based on the voters’ indicated preferences.
In a race in which multiple seats are to be filled, such as an at-large city council race, the
voter currently is instructed to select as many candidates as there are seats. Under a ranked
choice voting system, the voter instead would rank all of the candidates, and votes would be
transferred from the least popular candidates until the most popular candidates are identified as
winning the available seats.
Ranked choice voting can be conducted by a variety of counting methods, such as
alternative vote, single transferrable vote, and multiple transferrable vote, but the same basic
voting procedure applies to all of these methods. For more information about the counting
methods that are included under the umbrella of ranked choice voting, along with examples of
jurisdictions that use those methods, see the Council of State Governments article, Ranked
Choice Voting: What, Where, Why & Why Not.9
Example
In this example, a mayoral election is conducted using ranked choice voting – specifically,
the alternative vote method – to determine the winner. Four candidates for mayor appear on
the ballot at the general election (candidates A, B, C, and D), and a candidate needs a majority
vote (50% + 1 vote) to win.
Imagine that a voter’s first choice is Candidate D, but the voter also knows that Candidate
D is not very popular and is unlikely to win. If Candidate D cannot win, the voter would prefer
Candidate B over candidates A and C. Under Ohio’s current voting system, the voter would have
to choose between supporting Candidate D or Candidate B on the ballot. Under ranked choice
voting, the voter instead could fill out the ballot as follows:
Ballot for Mayor of City
Voter’s ranking from 1-4,
Candidate
with 1 being the favorite
A 4
B 2
C 3
D 1
9Council of State Governments, Ranked Choice Voting: What, Where, Why & Why Not (March 21, 2023),
available via a google.com keyword search for “CSG ranked choice voting.” See also Ballotpedia, Ranked-
choice voting (RCV), available at ballotpedia.org via a keyword search for “ranked choice voting.”
P a g e |3 H.B. 684
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
A total of 1,000 ballots are cast in the election. In the first round of vote counting, for each
candidate, the election officials count the number of ballots that list that candidate as the first
choice. The results are:
First round results
Candidate First choice Percentage
A 400 40%
B 250 25%
C 200 20%
D 150 15%
Total votes 1,000 100%
Under Ohio’s existing system, counting would end at this stage, and Candidate A would
win by virtue of receiving the most votes at 40%, although no candidate received a majority vote.
But, under ranked choice voting, counting continues using voter rankings until a candidate
achieves a majority. Before the second round of counting, Candidate D, the candidate with the
least votes, is eliminated. The 150 voters who listed Candidate D as first choice have their votes
transferred to their second choice candidates. Ten voters listed Candidate A as second choice,
110 voters listed Candidate B as second choice, and 30 voters listed Candidate C as second choice.
Second round results
Second choice
Candidate First choice transfers from Total Percentage
Candidate D
A 400 + 10 410 41%
B 250 + 110 360 36%
C 200 + 30 230 23%
D Eliminated, 150 votes transferred to other candidates
Total votes 1,000 100%
After the second round, Candidate C is eliminated as the remaining candidate with the
least votes. For the third round, the 230 votes for Candidate C are transferred to each voter’s
next preferred candidate (the voter’s second or third choice) – 60 votes to Candidate A and 170
to Candidate B.
P a g e |4 H.B. 684
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
Third round results
Second or
Second choice
third choice
Candidate First choice transfers from Total Percentage
transfers from
Candidate D
Candidate C
A 400 + 10 + 60 470 47%
B 250 + 110 + 170 530 53%
C Eliminated, 230 votes transferred to other candidates
D Eliminated, 150 votes transferred to other candidates
Total votes 1,000 100%
After the third round of counting, Candidate B wins the election by achieving a majority
of the votes cast in the race. Candidate B was not most voters’ first choice, but based on the
rankings, Candidate B was more popular than Candidate A. As noted above, if ranked choice
voting were not used, Candidate A would have been the winner.
HISTORY
Action Date
Introduced 11-04-24
ANHB0684IN-135/sb
P a g e |5 H.B. 684
As Introduced