The Independent View: Nevada Top Three with RCV, Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA)

A nascent movement for inclusive electoral reform has been steadily growing in Nevada.

An unavoidable fact about electing public officers is that many more voters will vote in the general election than in a nominating or winnowing primary election. The primary election may be critical, or even decisive, as to who will be elected, and still fewer voters will participate in it than in the general election.

It is therefore critical that reforms to open primaries also keep the general elections open: open to meaningful competition among candidates representing diverse viewpoints.

The “Top Three” system being proposed in Nevada, could keep the Top Two preliminary but advance more than two candidates to the general election. This more open and diverse general election would be conducted by ranked choice voting, ensuring that the increased number of candidates would not result in outcries over “spoiler” candidates.

The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) attempts to achieve many of the Top Two objectives, though it takes a more incremental approach. Under NEMRA, the top three candidates would advance to the general election, which would then be conducted by ranked choice voting.

NEMRA does not address a problematic provision currently in Nevada law that allows candidates to win outright in the primary and never face general election voters. Voters in the higher turnout general election should always have a chance to weigh in on the candidates. One compromise position that NEMRA might want to consider is the Louisiana system, where all candidates run on the high turnout general election ballot, and the election is won if any candidate earns more than half the votes. If not, the top three could go to the December ballot for a runoff with ranked choice voting. This would ensure that Nevadans’ representation is never decided through the sometimes paltry turnout of a primary election.

NEMRA represents a real step forward in how reformers think about primary election reform. It acknowledges that the defects of the primary election must be reformed in a way that incorporates the whole election, and does not treat open primaries as a panacea. General elections matter.