Share This Article
Article Summary
The Ohio General Assembly has passed Senate Bill 63, a measure that would ban ranked choice voting statewide and penalize cities that attempt to use it. Although no Ohio city currently uses ranked choice voting, Cincinnati has a unique history with the system. The bill now awaits Governor Mike DeWine’s signature and raises broader questions about election structure, local authority, and how power is distributed in Ohio.
Ranked choice voting is no longer a theoretical reform debate in Ohio.
This week, the Ohio House joined the Senate in passing Senate Bill 63, which would prohibit ranked choice voting in all state and local elections.
The legislation now heads to Governor Mike DeWine for consideration. Ranked Choice Voting has been a topic of debate throughout the legislative process.
No Ohio city currently uses ranked choice voting. However, the bill prevents future adoption — including in charter cities like Cincinnati. As a result, the issue has shifted from speculation to structural lawmaking.
At stake is more than ballot design. The debate centers on who controls Ohio’s election systems: the state legislature or local governments.
What Senate Bill 63 Does
Senate Bill 63 bans ranked choice voting statewide. The prohibition applies to state offices, local elections, and any political subdivision.
The bill passed the Ohio Senate in May 2025 by a 27–5 vote. On February 25, 2026, the Ohio House approved the measure 63–27. The bill must return briefly to the Senate for concurrence on House amendments before it can be sent to Governor DeWine.
One provision gives the legislation practical force. Any municipality or chartered county that attempts to implement ranked choice voting could lose access to Local Government Fund distributions from the state.
Supporters of the bill argue that elections should remain uniform and straightforward across Ohio. Opponents argue that the state is preempting local authority before any city has formally adopted the system.
What Ranked Choice Voting Is
Ranked choice voting, also known as instant runoff voting, allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference rather than selecting only one.
If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes:
-
The lowest vote-getter is eliminated
-
Ballots are redistributed to the next-ranked choice
-
The process repeats until one candidate secures a majority
Supporters say the system reduces vote splitting and ensures majority winners without requiring a separate runoff election. Critics argue it increases ballot complexity, may confuse voters unfamiliar with ranking systems, and can result in ballot exhaustion if voters do not rank multiple candidates.
Ballot exhaustion occurs when all of a voter’s ranked candidates are eliminated before the final round, meaning that the ballot no longer counts in the final tally.
Cincinnati’s History With Proportional Representation
Cincinnati is not new to ranked ballots.
From 1924 to 1957, the city used a form of proportional representation that incorporated ranked choice voting for city council elections. The system was adopted to weaken the influence of a dominant political machine and to produce more proportional outcomes in council representation.
The final use occurred in 1955. The system was repealed in 1957. Since then, Cincinnati voters rejected attempts to reinstate ranked voting in 1988, 1991, and 2008.
Today, Cincinnati uses an at-large council system. Voters may select up to nine candidates without ranking them. The top nine vote-getters win seats.
That system tends to reward organized slates and candidates with broad name recognition. It does not require a majority support for each winner.
Why the Debate Resurfaced
In recent years, advocacy groups such as Rank the Vote Ohio have renewed efforts to promote instant runoff voting as a reform option. Supporters argue that ranked choice voting encourages coalition-building, reduces negative campaigning, and allows independent or minority-party candidates to compete without acting as spoilers.
Cincinnati, Lakewood, and Stow have been mentioned in public discussions about potential election reform conversations.
However, no formal ballot initiative has advanced in Cincinnati. Senate Bill 63 would prohibit such experimentation if it becomes law.
The Financial Leverage: Local Government Fund
The inclusion of Local Government Fund penalties elevates this debate beyond symbolism.
The Local Government Fund distributes state tax revenue to municipalities and counties. For cities like Cincinnati, these funds support general operations, including safety services and infrastructure.
By conditioning access to those funds on compliance, the legislature has created a strong deterrent against local deviation from statewide election policy.
Supporters argue that this ensures compliance and prevents fragmented election systems across Ohio. Critics argue that it uses fiscal leverage to override charter city authority.
The Home Rule Question
Cincinnati operates under a charter and possesses home rule authority under the Ohio Constitution. Home rule generally allows municipalities to govern local matters unless state law preempts them.
Opponents of the ranked choice voting ban argue that municipal election structure for local offices should fall within that authority. They view Senate Bill 63 as a state preemption of local governance.
Supporters counter that election procedures affect statewide uniformity and voter clarity, making them appropriate subjects for state regulation.
The debate mirrors broader tensions in Ohio between state lawmakers and urban governments over policy experimentation.
How Ranked Choice Voting Would Change Cincinnati Elections
If ranked choice voting were implemented for the Cincinnati City Council under the current at-large system, several dynamics could shift.
First, majority thresholds would matter. Instead of simply finishing in the top nine, candidates would need to survive elimination rounds and accumulate transferred preferences.
Second, the campaign strategy would likely change. Candidates might seek second- and third-choice support from voters aligned with other candidates, encouraging broader coalition messaging.
Third, organized slates could either strengthen or weaken, depending on how ranking behavior developed among voters.
Critics argue that these changes introduce complexity without clear benefits. Supporters argue they produce winners with broader consensus backing.
Under Senate Bill 63, that debate becomes largely theoretical.
Political Context
The House vote followed largely partisan lines, with Republican support and Democratic opposition in debate. However, the central argument from supporters focused less on party advantage and more on administrative consistency.
Critics referenced Alaska’s use of ranked choice voting and argued that election outcomes can shift in later counting rounds. Supporters of ranked systems note that such outcomes reflect majority preference aggregation rather than manipulation.
The Ohio legislation does not assess whether ranked choice voting produces better or worse results. It simply prohibits its use.
What Happens Next
Senate Bill 63 must return to the Ohio Senate for concurrence on House amendments. If approved, it will move to Governor Mike DeWine’s desk.
If signed into law, ranked choice voting will be prohibited statewide unless future legislation reverses the ban.
For Cincinnati, there is no pending ballot measure. The issue remains prospective. But the state legislature has acted decisively to close the option.
A Structural Decision
The ranked choice voting debate in Ohio ultimately reflects a structural decision.
The General Assembly has chosen uniformity over experimentation. Whether that protects election clarity or limits municipal autonomy depends on perspective.
For Cincinnati, the immediate impact is limited. The city is not using ranked choice voting today.
The longer-term question is whether Ohio’s largest cities should retain flexibility to experiment with election systems in the future — or whether those decisions belong solely at the state level.
That question will likely resurface in other policy areas, even if the ranked choice voting debate is resolved for now.
Read More
Is Cincinnati Pension Reform Stabilizing the System — or Positioning It for OPERS?
FAQs
Does Cincinnati currently use ranked choice voting?
No. Cincinnati has not used ranked choice voting since the 1950s.
What is ballot exhaustion?
Ballot exhaustion occurs when a voter’s ranked choices are all eliminated before the final round, meaning the ballot no longer counts toward the remaining candidates.
Why would cities lose Local Government Fund money?
Senate Bill 63 includes a provision that withholds funding from municipalities that attempt to implement ranked choice voting.
Has ranked choice voting been used elsewhere in the U.S.?
Yes. Several states and municipalities, including Alaska, use versions of instant runoff voting.
Can Cincinnati adopt ranked choice voting in the future?
If Senate Bill 63 becomes law, municipalities would not be permitted to implement ranked choice voting unless the statute is amended or repealed.
