California upgraded democracy once. Let’s finish the job.
California pioneered top-two primaries in 2010, and academic research confirms that the process produces more broadly appealing candidates than methods other states around the country are using.
But it’s far from perfect. The system is still vulnerable to vote-splitting, a phenomenon Golden State voters know all too well. When a packed field of candidates from one party splits the vote, it creates the very real possibility of candidates from another occupying both spots in the gubernatorial general election.
Regardless of who emerges from the primary, it’s highly likely that they’ll advance with pluralities in the teens to low-20s. And no matter what, voters will face a binary choice in November.
Californians deserve better. If you’re unhappy with the state of politics here — or across the country, for that matter — it’s time to upgrade the system to produce results that are more reflective and representative of the people.
Approval Voting
—
End Vote-Splitting
—
Top-Four Primaries
—
Unrig the System
—
Approval Voting — End Vote-Splitting — Top-Four Primaries — Unrig the System —
2025
New York
The California Solution
Top-Four Primaries: Instead of just two, four candidates advance to the general election. This ensures that voters will have real options instead of a forced binary choice that could ultimately be between two members of the same party.
Approval Voting: An elegant solution to vote-splitting. Instead of picking one candidate in the general election, voters are free to support as many as they wish. Each selection is equally weighted. Whoever gets the most support wins.
No rankings required. No more forced binaries. No more vote-splitting.
The result: Better candidates. Better representation. Better results.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Plurality voting — specifically, the “pick-only-one-candidate” part — is the root cause of several structural flaws in our electoral system, including vote-splitting, the spoiler effect, and forced binary choices. These structural flaws give us electoral results that are often not reflective of the true will of the voters. By forcing voters to pick only one candidate in a given race, plurality voting forces us to choose between lesser evils instead of expressing our true preferences.
-
Vote-splitting makes it possible for extremist minority factions to win elections when pitted against fields of two or more moderate candidates.
If two moderate candidates run against one extremist candidate, the extremist candidate can win with as little as 34% of the vote, and even less if there are more moderates:
• Moderate A: 33%
• Moderate B: 33%
• Extremist: 34% (winner)
This is the phenomenon that allowed Donald Trump to win the 2016 Republican primaries despite being the single most unfavorably viewed candidate in the race.
-
Duverger’s Law was first recognized by mid-20th Century political scientist Maurice Duverger. He observed that using plurality voting in single-winner races will tend toward a two-party system. This is because voters are incentivized to vote for the candidate most likely to beat the candidate they least prefer to prevent the latter from winning. It’s the reason behind the phrase “lesser of two evils.”
-
Approval voting has numerous direct benefits for voters, and it alters the incentives for politicians in ways that ultimately benefit everyone.
With approval voting, voters can vote for their favorite candidates without fear of their choices ultimately helping the candidates they least prefer. Approval voting eliminates vote-splitting and spoilers because voters can support all candidates they find acceptable.
Approval voting also makes politicians more accountable to their voters. Incumbent’s advantage is greatly diminished; poor performance can result in challenges from other candidates on the same side of the political spectrum. Most importantly, approval voting makes coalition building and broad appeal the winning strategy — running negative attack ads against opponents and catering to narrow interests can backfire.
-
Primary elections that advance the top four vote-getters ensure that voters have a diverse field of candidates to choose from. They also make it possible for independent and third-party candidates to advance to the general election and have a reasonable chance of winning. This gives voters better candidates and more of them.
-
Approval voting simply allows voters to vote for multiple candidates in a race. Each selection is equally weighted, and the candidate that receives the most votes wins. Approval voting eliminates vote-splitting and the spoiler effect by allowing voters to vote for every candidate they would “approve” of winning the race.
-
No.
While both systems allow voters to support multiple candidates, that’s where the similarities end. Approval voting does not force voters to rank their choices in order of preference.
Approval voting’s most important advantage over ranked-choice voting is its simplicity. It’s easier to explain, easier to implement, easier for voters to adapt to, and it produces results every bit as quickly as plurality voting does today.
Ranked-choice measures failed in multiple states in 2024 despite well-funded campaigns in favor of the measures. They failed because opponents rightly pointed out that ranked-choice voting causes confusion among voters, requires special election equipment, and elections that use ranked-choice take far longer to tabulate votes and produce a winner.
-
The structural flaws caused by plurality voting make it possible — and over enough time, inevitable — for extremist minority factions to hijack our political institutions and threaten our democracy.
Especially when combined with partisan primary elections, plurality voting incentivizes candidates to take increasingly extreme positions to cater to narrow interests. Ultimately, plurality voting disincentivizes cross-partisan cooperation and punishes politicians that work across the aisle. And when an electoral system rewards dysfunction, we are all ultimately worse off.
Get In Touch
Interested in learning more about Fortify Democracy, electoral reform, or stopping authoritarianism from taking root in the United States? That’s what we’re about!
We welcome all inquiries, but please note that we are required to only accept donations from American citizens and entities.