The Expand Democracy 5: Mamdani’s win under RCV, bipartisan union for citizen-initiated ballot measures, VA cuts voter data costs, voting barriers in Native American communities, and timely links
June 26th, 2025
Welcome to the latest edition of The Expand Democracy 5. We're bringing you the latest stories and links about democracy, locally and globally, thanks to the help of Rob Richie and Juniper Shelley. Today's stories include:
🏆 Mamdami’s victory and how RCV changed the game
⚡ Unilateral defense of citizen-initiated ballot measures
💸 VA cuts voter data costs
🚧 Barriers to voting in Native American communities
🕓 This week’s timely links
#1. Deep dive: How Zohran Mamdani Won the NYC Democratic Primary and What It Says About RCV
[Zohran Mandani and Brad Lander after cross-endorsement. Source: NYT]
In a crowded NYC Democratic primary, Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani has secured a decisive victory over an unusually high-profile and well-financed challenger: former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who swept establishment endorsements and had a Super PAC spend $24 million on his behalf. While New York City is holding off on releasing the ranked choice voting (RCV) tallies until July 1st, Mamdani’s lead, as well as the polls and campaign dynamics, indicate that he will expand that lead with RCV.
Mamdani’s win underscores how RCV can bolster democratic legitimacy, especially in competitive primaries with many candidates. It also offers valuable takeaways for RCV elections that could translate to elections more broadly - how a grassroots candidate can beat establishment money when running a more inclusive campaign, and how reforming elections can dramatically shift the incentives in politics.
At only 33 years old, Mamdami was first elected to the Assembly in 2020, representing parts of western Queens, and gained recognition for his work on housing justice and public transportation. Polling in the low single digits a year ago, he emerged over the last year driven by relentless energy, a growing volunteer base, and charisma that led me to leapfrog over better known candidates. His final challenge was surpassing Cuomo, who led in nearly every poll and brought national name recognition and strong ties to traditional Democratic donors and consultants.
RCV allowed New Yorkers to rank up to five candidates in order of preference. That simple change fundamentally altered the election’s incentives. Instead of launching a ruthless, no-holds-barred campaign, Mamdani concentrated on building connections. He ran a positive campaign, cross-endorsing other candidates, earning the backing of key figures like Brad Lander, and reaching out to a wide range of voters and other campaigns.
Mamdani’s mobilization efforts included a novel and effective use of social media as a tool to garner support. On TikTok, the mayoral candidate explained how RCV works to his followers in English, Bengala, and Spanish. In New York City, where half of the residents speak a language other than English, this effort demonstrated Mamdani’s commitment to represent and connect with constituents of diverse backgrounds. Other content posted on his social media included casual interviews on the subway, cold plunges in Coney Island, and stops for NYC burritos. In a Democratic party that has struggled to reach a younger generation, Mamdani's youthful content made his campaign feel fresh and personal.
Mamdani held a strong lead on first-choice ballots, hovering near 45%. Under a plurality voting system, that could have triggered concerns about vote-splitting, and potentially opened the door for a lower-polling, better-funded candidate to win with a fraction of support. Instead, RCV helped consolidate preferences among ideologically aligned voters, setting up Mamdani to gain further support through second- and third-choice votes. We’ll see his final margin next week.
His approach sharply contrasts with Cuomo’s strategy. While two candidates said they backed Cuomo, he didn’t return the favor. He said he only ranked one candidate - himself. That stance, reflected in his campaign style, hurt his chances under RCV. As a growing body of evidence shows, RCV doesn’t necessarily reward the most moderate candidate. Rather, it rewards the most unifying one. Mamdani’s inclusive approach is consistent with trends in RCV contests across the US, where winning candidates often receive high rankings from more than 75% of voters in competitive races. Such a mandate is especially valuable in party primaries. As in the 2021 Virginia Republican primary that elevated Glenn Youngkin, RCV helps parties rally around broadly acceptable nominees. In general elections, RCV’s appeal lies in its ability to mitigate the “spoiler effect”, but in primaries, it’s just as much about encouraging positive campaigns and party unity.
A few other observations about the campaign:
Building a Campaign Around Mobilization, Not Funding: While many candidates rely on large Super PACs to blanket the airwaves or fund attack ads, Mamdani benefited from progressive PACs focused on turnout and organizing. That’s a strategic advantage in an RCV environment, where tearing down opponents can backfire. When voters can rank multiple candidates, attacking a fellow progressive may alienate the very voters a candidate hopes to pick up in later rounds.
This dynamic also changes how PACs operate. Movement-aligned groups are increasingly investing in field efforts that build coalitions and foster trust, rather than just visibility. That shift, which is still taking shape, may redefine campaign finance norms in cities that use RCV.
Speed, Accuracy, and Public Perception: Critics of RCV sometimes point to the pace of tabulations. In New York City, the first RCV tallies won't be released until Tuesday. The City’s delay is unnecessary, with first tallies logistically possible no later than June 3. Indeed, the great majority of jurisdictions using RCV release preliminary tallies within 24 hours. Even with the current timeline, RCV remains faster than a traditional delayed runoff, which would mean longer waits and greater cost. In contrast, RCV resolves the election in one round, even as election officials continue to work on modernizing their reporting processes.
RCV Expands Voter Power: A critique sometimes raised is ballot errors, particularly overvotes, when voters mistakenly rank more than one candidate at the same level. But studies show these errors are rare: in a typical RCV election, fewer than one in 200 ballots are rejected due to an overvote. Meanwhile, the advantages of voter power are significant. In elections that use instant runoff, over 30% more ballots typically count toward the final result compared to traditional voting. In NYC’s primary, more than 200,000 voters selected someone other than Cuomo or Mamdani as their first choice. It’s likely that more than 75% of those voters will have ranked one of the two frontrunners, meaning that roughly 150,000 extra votes will help decide the winner, likely some 50 times more ballots than those rejected as overvotes. While no system is perfect, and vote-by-mail, for instance, causes more ballot rejections than RCV, RCV lets far more people influence who actually wins.
Electoral Reforms Can Change Politics: Mamdani’s victory is a case study in how electoral reform can reshape campaigns, coalitions, and outcomes. It shows that a candidate backed by grassroots organizing, aligned PACs, and a hopeful, coalition-building message can win against formidable and much better-financed opposition. And it shows that RCV, even when it doesn’t change the winner, can make the path to victory more representative, more inclusive, and more democratic.
Will New York City keep RCV?: Such an impactful change, unsurprisingly, is drawing attention to itself. Many City voices and even the Washington Post have weighed in strongly backing RCV, but the current City Charter Commission is seriously considering proposing a California-style “Top Two primary.” Rob Richie and Cynthia Terrell each testified ot the Charter Commission this week, providing reasons for instead building on RCV’s use to add it in general elections. New Yorkers can provide their own opinion at this link.
#2. Defending Citizen Initiatives: New Report Highlights Bipartisan Support
Amid a year of bitter polarization and high-stakes elections, a surprising trend has emerged: voters across party lines are joining forces to protect their right to direct democracy. According to a new report from the Election Reformers Network, voters soundly defeated attempts in Arizona, Colorado, and North Dakota to restrict the citizen initiative process in the 2024 elections.
These measures, introduced by state legislatures, sought to raise barriers such as stricter signature requirements, tighter filing deadlines, and even mandates that initiatives pass twice to become law. Yet voters rejected all of them, often by double-digit margins.
What’s striking is who rejected them. The report found that support for protecting citizen initiatives came not just from Democratic strongholds, but also from counties that voted for Donald Trump. In both Colorado and North Dakota, every Trump-won county voted against the proposed restrictions. This wasn’t a blue vs. red issue; it was a shared defense of voter power.
That stands in contrast to other reforms on the ballot. Proposals to adopt ranked choice voting and/or variations of nonpartisan primaries fell short in every state where they appeared, dividing voters sharply along partisan lines. Yet when it came to direct democracy, the consensus was striking: 100% of the counties in Colorado that voted for Trump, and nearly all in North Dakota, stood up to defend voters’ rights.
While partisan trench warfare continues on many fronts, the citizen initiative process remains one of the few areas where Americans still find common cause. As ERN notes, “this is a vital opening for democracy advocates: a chance to protect, and even expand, a process that voters trust, regardless of party.”
[From the report: “Figure 1 illustrates the county-level election results, plotting Trump’s vote-share in each county horizontally and the “no” vote on each measure vertically. Overall, in 89% of counties a majority voted to defend citizen initiatives, and this number was 93% in Trump-won counties.” (p. 4)]
#3. Virginia Cuts Voter‑Data Costs by 90% to Level the Field
In a bold move announced on June 24, 2025, Virginia’s Department of Elections declared a dramatic 90% price drop on access to voter‑registration lists, dropping the cost of a full statewide file from $6,000 to just $600. This is a deliberate effort to boost transparency and equity in Virginia’s electoral environment. By slashing fees on essential voter data, the state is opening doors for first‑time candidates, under‑resourced campaigns, PACs, nonprofits, and election researchers who depend on this information for outreach and modeling but have historically been shut out by steep costs.
Under Virginia law, only entities such as registered candidates, parties, PACs, nonprofits, and academic researchers can access this data. Therefore, the cut will not benefit commercial sellers or the general public, but it will significantly broaden opportunities and participation among legitimate civic actors. This change is just in time for Virginia’s 2025 election cycle, which includes races for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and the full General Assembly. It follows criticisms that Virginia’s voter-data fees were among the highest in the nation, far above those of 24 states charging under $1,000 and 10 states (plus D.C.) offering data for free.
Virginia is already rated one of the most voter‑friendly states, offering online registration, early voting, same‑day registration, and absentee voting. These benefits are working: evident in historic turnout rates for Virginia’s 2025 primary elections, breaking records for the first time in three decades.
By making voter‑file data broadly accessible, Virginia is removing a financial barrier that disproportionately affected grassroots and emerging campaigns. This is a small change with big implications - mentorship networks, civic groups, and state reformers should celebrate and scrutinize whether this translates into wider candidate diversity and voter outreach.
#4. Voting Barriers on Native American Reservations
(written by Expand Democracy’s summer intern Juniper Shelley)
[A young woman in Monument Valley Tribal Park in Arizona. Source: The Guardian]
For members of the Navajo Nation, voting on election day is a production. The Navajo reservation encompasses 17 million acres of land, roughly the same size as West Virginia. As a result, voters’ post office boxes and polling places can be more than 50 miles from their homes on the reservation. Navajo voters in Arizona report traveling up to 140 miles round-trip to mail their ballots, far more than the average voter. This geographical isolation, combined with restricted in-person voting and mail-in ballot challenges, systematically disenfranchises Native Americans in Arizona and across the country.
Today, most Arizonans vote by mail. While mail-in voting has been rightly hailed as an accessible option for Americans who are working, disabled, or in the military, it isn’t sufficient for the vast majority of Native Americans who do not receive mail to their homes due to nontraditional street addresses. Long commutes to shared P.O. boxes or the nearest polling place are exacerbated by unpaved roads and come with a price tag that burdens the 33% of Indigenous community members who live in poverty.
Even after reaching the polls, Native Americans continue to face obstacles. Although a judge ruled that Arizona voters without an address or with a P.O. box could use a tribal ID card to register in 2023, Native Americans are still turned away when the address on their ID cards doesn’t match voter records. Additionally, 90% of reservations lack cell service, making it difficult for residents to register to vote online in advance.
These barriers result in a voter turnout on reservations that is 11 percentage points lower than the national average, lower than that of any racial group in the United States. In Arizona, a critical swing state where 6% of the population identifies as indigenous, the Native American vote can and has decided election outcomes, illustrating the value of engaging indigenous voters. Strikingly, President Joe Biden won Arizona by 10,000 votes in 2020, while voters on the Hopi and Navajo reservations alone cast nearly 60,000 ballots. Despite their critical importance, however, state and federal policies continue to disproportionately limit Native American access to the polls.
Indigenous communities themselves have been at the forefront of powerful activism designed to boost Native American involvement in democratic systems. Jaynie Parrish, a member of the Navajo Nation, founded Arizona Native Votes, a nonprofit dedicated to building political power in rural and tribal communities. Her team has made powerful strides in Arizona, working directly with communities to provide education about voter registration, elections, government, and voting rights. “We want community members to understand how their vote really can make a difference, to see the direct connection and impact of their vote and participation on their daily lives,” says Parrish, illustrating the power of community-led advocacy work.
#5. Timely Links
Trump’s 2024 Coalition Was More Diverse Than You Think: A new Pew Research Center report breaks down the voter coalitions behind the 2024 presidential election and challenges conventional wisdom. While Trump lost ground with white voters, he made gains among Black, Latino, and Asian American voters, assembling a more racially and ethnically diverse base than in previous cycles - and likely would have greatly expanded his narrow popular vote margin with 100% participation. The report underscores shifting political alignments and the limits of traditional assumptions about party support.
Independent and third-party voter registration growing, largely at the expense of Democrats: From NBC News: “The number of registered independents and third-party members is growing as voters are breaking from the two-party system at increasing rates, according to an NBC News analysis of voter registration data. As of 2025, 32% of registered voters across the dozens of states and territories with reported data chose not to affiliate with either the Democratic or Republican parties, up from 23% in 2000.”
Eric Adams Bets on Independent Run for 2025 Re‑election: NYC’s incumbent mayor is building his own party line and skipping the Democratic primary after a federal judge dropped corruption charges. Adams will run as an independent in November, targeting moderate Democrats, Republicans, and ethnic communities, with a focus on his record on crime and COVID-19 recovery. Unlike New York City primaries, the general election will be a “top of the heap” plurality contest where someone could win with far less than half the vote.
Georgia Supreme Court overturns 2024 State Election Board rules: Here's a daily update from the Voting Rights Lab: “The Georgia Supreme Court unanimously struck down several rules adopted by the State Election Board and later blocked by a lower court prior to the 2024 general election. The Supreme Court found that the Board exceeded its authority and intruded on legislative powers, invalidating several rules including: requiring hand-counting of ballots, expanded poll-watcher access, and requiring photo ID for mail ballot drop-offs. The Court upheld a rule requiring video surveillance for drop boxes and remanded two other rules to lower courts for further review.”
Hearing the Voice of Local Election Officials: The Elections & Voting Information Center (EVIC) Local Election Official Survey project is designed to give a voice to local election officials (LEOs). The invaluable electionline summarizes a concerning finding: “A deeper dive into job satisfaction provided in this policy brief shows a very worrisome trend – a steep and enduring decline in job satisfaction among LEOs serving in the smallest (< 5,001 registered voters) jurisdictions.”
Great explanation of RCV as key to Mamdani's win and cheers for his inclusive, energizing, and positive approach. This is a model for Democracy. And NYC better keep RCV!