Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Heated testimony for and against Ohio bill to ban ranked‑choice voting; opponents cite home rule
Summary
Dozens of witnesses testified for and against SB 63, which would ban ranked‑choice voting in much of Ohio and withhold state funds from municipalities that adopt it; proponents said RCV is confusing and costly, while opponents argued it is a proven method that supports local experimentation and warned the bill undermines municipal home rule.
The House General Government Committee heard extensive third‑hearing testimony on Senate Bill 63, a proposal that would prohibit ranked‑choice voting in many circumstances and create fiscal disincentives for municipalities that adopt it.
Proponents: Chad Enos, vice president of Honest Elections Project ACTION, argued in proponent testimony that ranked‑choice voting (RCV) ‘‘makes every stage of the election more confusing and inconvenient,’’ that it can lengthen voting time and add administrative complexity, and that the…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
