Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Oregon Measure 117, Ranked-Choice Voting for Federal and State Elections Measure (2024)
| Oregon Measure 117 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 5, 2024 | |
| Topic Electoral systems | |
Status Defeated | |
| Type State statute | Origin State legislature |
Oregon Measure 117, the Ranked-Choice Voting for Federal and State Elections Measure, was on the ballot in Oregon as a legislatively referred state statute on November 5, 2024. The ballot measure was defeated.
A "yes" vote supported implementing ranked-choice voting primary and general elections for federal and state executive offices beginning in 2028. |
A "no" vote opposed implementing ranked-choice voting primary and general elections for federal and state executive offices, thereby maintaining the candidate with the highest number of votes wins. |
Election results
See also: Results for ranked-choice voting (RCV) and electoral system ballot measures, 2024
|
Oregon Measure 117 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 893,668 | 42.30% | ||
|
|
1,219,013 | 57.70% | ||
Overview
How would Measure 117 have changed Oregon's electoral system?
- See also: Measure design
The ballot measure would have established ranked-choice voting (RCV) for elections to federal and state offices, including the president, U.S. senator, U.S. representative, governor, secretary of state, attorney general, state treasurer, and commissioner of labor and industries. At the time of the election, Oregon used a plurality voting system in which the candidate with the highest number of votes wins. The ballot measure would not have affected state legislative elections, which would have continued to use plurality voting.
The law would have authorized cities, counties, school districts, other local governments, and local districts to use ranked-choice voting for local elections unless home rule charters preempted it. It would have also required the secretary of state to establish a program to educate voters about ranked-choice voting. The law would have taken effect on January 1, 2028.[1]
As of 2024, three local jurisdictions—Benton County, Multnomah County, and Portland—had adopted ranked-choice voting.
Who supported and opposed the adoption of RCV in Oregon?
- See also: Support and Opposition
This measure was the first ranked-choice voting statewide ballot measure put on the ballot by the state legislature. The vote was along party lines, except for one Republican who joined Democrats in voting in favor of the bill. Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates led the campaign in support of the measure. House Speaker Dan Rayfield (D-16) said, "Ranked choice voting will give voters more choice, encourage voter engagement, and strengthen our democracy by improving peoples’ perception of elections and election outcomes. House Bill 2004 would make sure people in power are elected by a true 50% majority."[2]
The Equal Vote Coalition and the Oregon Association of County Clerks registered in opposition to the measure during the legislative process. Sara Wolk, executive director of the Equal Vote Coalition, said: "RCV ignores most voters' rankings, so it can eliminate a candidate who was actually preferred overall. This happened in the 2022 Alaska Special Election, where despite claims that the problem had been solved, the election was spoiled by Sarah Palin, flipping the seat blue rather than electing the moderate Republican who was preferred over all others according to the ballots cast. For Palin voters, ranking her 1st choice actually backfired and ironically helped elect their last choice instead. In Oregon, a similar spoiler effect scenario could easily flip a seat from Blue to Red."[3]
Which other states adopted ranked-choice voting?
As of 2024, two states adopted and implemented ranked-choice voting at the state level via ballot measure. Maine was the first state to adopt it, in 2016. Alaska was the second state to adopt it, in 2020. In 2022, Nevada voters approved an RCV initiative that needed to be approved again in 2024 to take effect. One state (Hawaii) had implemented RCV in certain elections. Another fifteen states contained jurisdictions that had implemented RCV at the local level. Another two states (Illinois and Washington) contained jurisdictions that had adopted but not yet implemented RCV in local elections. Five states had enacted legislation banning the use of ranked-choice voting in statewide or local elections. One RCV ballot measure was defeated in Massachusetts in 2020 with 54.8% opposing it.
A list of historical state and local RCV measures is available here.
Measure design
- See also: Text of measure
How would Measure 117 have changed Oregon's electoral system?
- See also: Measure design
The ballot measure would have established ranked-choice voting for elections to federal and state offices, including the president, U.S. senator, U.S. representative, governor, secretary of state, attorney general, state treasurer, and commissioner of labor and industries. A ranked-choice voting system is an electoral system in which voters rank candidates by preference on their ballots. If a candidate won a majority of first-preference votes, they would be declared the winner. If no candidate won a majority of first-preference votes, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes would be eliminated. First-preference votes cast for the failed candidate would be eliminated, and the next-preference choices on those ballots would be counted. This process would be repeated until a candidate won an outright majority.[1]
For elections using ranked-choice voting to elect multiple candidates to a single office, the law would have required the secretary of state to adopt a proportional methodology. The law would have also authorized cities, counties, school districts, other local governments, and local districts to use ranked-choice voting for local elections unless home rule charters preempted it.[1]
The law would have required the secretary of state to establish a program to educate voters about ranked-choice voting. It would have also stated that if the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which Oregon is a part of, took effect, the state would report the winner of the final tabulation round to the compact. However, if the winner of the final tabulation was different from the winner of the national popular vote, Oregon would be required to elect electors for the candidate who won the national popular vote in accordance with the compact.[1]
The law would have taken effect on January 1, 2028.[1]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title was as follows:[4]
| “ | Gives voters option to rank candidates in order of preference; candidate receiving majority of votes in final round wins.
Result of 'Yes' Vote: 'Yes' vote gives voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference for specified federal and statewide offices. Establishes process for tallying votes in rounds, with the candidate receiving the fewest votes in each round being defeated and votes for the defeated candidate going to the voter’s next-highest ranked active candidate. Requires that candidate must receive majority of votes in final round of voting to win election. Result of 'No' Vote: 'No' vote maintains current voting system. Voter selects one candidate for federal and statewide offices. Candidate with most votes wins. Majority of votes not required for candidate to win election.[5] |
” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary was as follows:[4]
| “ | Current state law requires voters to select only one candidate for each office on the ballot. The candidate with the most votes after a single vote tally wins, even if not a majority. This measure gives voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference using "ranked choice voting." Under the measure, voters may choose to rank only one candidate or multiple candidates for each office, as well as write in candidate(s). Votes are counted toward each voter's highest-ranked candidate. If no candidate receives a majority of votes, votes are tallied automatically in rounds. The candidate receiving the fewest votes in each round is defeated. A defeated candidate's votes go to the voter's next highest-ranked candidate. The process continues until one candidate has a majority of votes. The measure applies to the nomination and election of President, United States Senator, Representative in Congress, Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer and Attorney General, and election of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries. The measure requires the Secretary of State to establish a program to educate voters about how ranked choice voting elections will be conducted. Authorizes local governments to adopt ranked choice voting for elections for local offices. Local governments that adopted ranked choice voting before 2025 may continue to use current method or modify it. The measure applies to elections beginning in 2028.[5] | ” |
Full text
The text of the statute is available below:[1]
Readability score
- See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2024
Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure.
The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 10, and the FRE is 49. The word count for the ballot title is 126.
The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 11, and the FRE is 43. The word count for the ballot summary is 228.
Support
Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates led the campaign in support of the measure.[6]
Supporters
The campaign provided a list of endorsements, which is available here.
Officials
- State Sen. Wlnsvey Campos (D)
- State Sen. Michael Dembrow (D)
- State Sen. Jeff Golden (D)
- State Sen. Janeen Sollman (D)
- State Rep. Tom Andersen (D)
- State Rep. Ben Bowman
- State Rep. Maxine Dexter (D)
- State Rep. Julie Fahey (D)
- State Rep. Mark Gamba (D)
- State Rep. Paul Holvey (D)
- State Rep. Emerson Levy (D)
- State Rep. John Lively (D)
- State Rep. Pam Marsh (D)
- State Rep. Rob Nosse (D)
- State Rep. Khanh Pham (D)
- State Rep. Dan Rayfield (D)
- State Rep. Lisa Reynolds (D)
- State Rep. Jules Walters (D)
- Mayor of Corvallis Charles Maughan
Political Parties
Government Entities
Unions
Organizations
- ACLU of Oregon
- Asian Pacific American Network of Oregon
- Common Cause Oregon
- FairVote Action
- League of Women Voters of Oregon
- Next Up Action Fund
- Planned Parenthood Advocates of Oregon
- Represent.Us
- RepresentWomen
- Sierra Club Oregon Chapter
- Tribal Democracy Project
- Urban League of Portland
- Veterans for Political Innovation
Arguments
Opposition
Opponents
Officials
- State Rep. Ed Diehl (R)
- State Rep. Bobby Levy (R)
- State Rep. E. Werner Reschke (R)
- Klamath County Clerk Rochelle Long (Nonpartisan)
Organizations
- Equal Vote Coalition
- Fair Elections Fund
- Oregon Association of County Clerks
- Taxpayers Association of Oregon
Arguments
Campaign finance
Yes on 117 registered as a political action committee to support Measure 117. Concerned Election Officials registered as a PAC to oppose Measure 117. There were three additional PACs that advocated for or against multiple measures, including two supporting Measure 117 and one opposed to the measure.
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $5,210,108.47 | $5,491,842.76 | $10,701,951.23 | $5,177,627.48 | $10,669,470.24 |
| Oppose | $14,115.00 | $0.00 | $14,115.00 | $16,508.30 | $16,508.30 |
| Total | $5,224,223.47 | $5,491,842.76 | $10,716,066.23 | $5,194,135.78 | $10,685,978.54 |
Support
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the ballot measure.[7]
| Committees in support of Measure 117 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| Yes on 117 | $3,889,108.47 | $5,467,744.61 | $9,356,853.08 | $3,887,175.42 | $9,354,920.03 |
| 2024 Our Oregon Voter Guide | $1,001,000.00 | $20,857.00 | $1,021,857.00 | $976,995.60 | $997,852.60 |
| Mobilize Oregon Voters | $320,000.00 | $3,241.15 | $323,241.15 | $313,456.46 | $316,697.61 |
| Total | $5,210,108.47 | $5,491,842.76 | $10,701,951.23 | $5,177,627.48 | $10,669,470.24 |
Donors
The following table shows the top donors to the committee registered in support of the ballot measure.[7]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oregon Ranked Choice Voting | $566,750.00 | $5,352,571.55 | $5,919,321.55 |
| Article IV | $2,830,000.00 | $0.00 | $2,830,000.00 |
| Our Oregon | $475,000.00 | $20,857.00 | $495,857.00 |
| Our American Future Action | $275,000.00 | $0.00 | $275,000.00 |
| Building Power for Communities of Color | $250,000.00 | $0.00 | $250,000.00 |
Opposition
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in opposition to the ballot measure.[7]
| Committees in opposition to Measure 117 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| Advance Liberty | $12,735.00 | $0.00 | $12,735.00 | $16,202.10 | $16,202.10 |
| Concerned Election Officials | $1,380.00 | $0.00 | $1,380.00 | $306.20 | $306.20 |
| Total | $14,115.00 | $0.00 | $14,115.00 | $16,508.30 | $16,508.30 |
Donors
The following table shows the top donors to the committee registered in opposition to the ballot measure.[7]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rochelle Long | $300.00 | $0.00 | $300.00 |
| Lisa Gambee | $200.00 | $0.00 | $200.00 |
Methodology
To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.
Media editorials
- See also: 2024 ballot measure media endorsements
Support
The following media editorial boards published an editorial supporting the ballot measure:
Opposition
The following media editorial boards published an editorial opposing the ballot measure:
Background
Oregon electoral system historical ballot measures
- See also: Electoral systems on the ballot
Oregon voted on four ballot measures related to various electoral system changes between 1908 and 2023. One was approved, and three were defeated.
In November 2008, voters defeated Oregon Measure 65, which would have implemented a top-two primary system where all candidates appear on one ballot and the two candidates who receive the most votes advance to a general election. It was defeated with 65.9% of voters opposing it.
Oregon Measure Nos. 348-349 (1914)
In November 1914, Oregon voters defeated Oregon Measure Nos. 348-349, which would have provided that each voter could vote for one candidate in state legislative elections and that the 60 legislative candidates who received the most votes from across the state would be elected. It was defeated with 77.5% of voters opposing it.
Oregon Measure Nos. 360-361 (1910)
In November 1910, Oregon voters defeated Oregon Measure Nos. 360-361, which would have amended the constitution to require proportional election of members of the state legislature from the state at large among other changes. It was defeated with 54.5% of voters opposing it.
Oregon Measure Nos. 328-329 (1908) 
In June 1908, Oregon voters approved Measure Nos. 328-329 to add Section 16 to Article II of the Oregon Constitution to allow for alternative state electoral systems in the state, such as proportional representation or elections in which voters make "direct or indirect expression of his first, second or additional choices." It was approved with 58.8% of the vote. Section 16 has not been amended since its addition in 1908.
Ranked-choice voting
- See also: Ranked-choice voting
Ranked-choice voting is a voting system where voters are able to rank candidates based on preference on their ballots. Ballots are processed in rounds. If a candidate wins a majority of first-preference votes, that candidate is declared the winner. If no candidate wins a majority of first-preference votes, the candidate in last place is eliminated, lifting the second-choice preference on the ballots. The process is continued until a candidate wins the simple majority (50% plus 1) of the votes.
How ranked-choice voting works
Broadly speaking, the ranked-choice voting process unfolds as follows for single-winner elections:
- Voters rank the candidates for a given office by preference on their ballots.
- If a candidate wins an outright majority of first-preference votes (i.e., 50 percent plus one), he or she will be declared the winner.
- If, on the other hand, no candidates win an outright majority of first-preference votes, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes is eliminated.
- All first-preference votes for the failed candidate are eliminated, lifting the second-preference choices indicated on those ballots.
- A new tally is conducted to determine whether any candidate has won an outright majority of the adjusted voters.
- The process is repeated until a candidate wins a majority of votes cast.
As of September 2025, ranked-choice voting is used in some states and localities across the United States. See the map, tables, and list below for further details. The numbers below do not include states where RCV is used by a political party for partisan primaries, or where military/UOCAVA voters use ranked ballots for runoff elections. For more information on these uses of RCV, see the table beneath the map below.
If you know of any additional U.S. localities using RCV that should be included here, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.[8]
- RCV used statewide: Three states use RCV statewide. Alaska and Maine use RCV in some federal and statewide elections, while Hawaii uses it for certain statewide elections.
- RCV used (or scheduled for use) in some localities: Fourteen states contain localities that either use or are scheduled to begin using RCV in municipal elections.
- RCV prohibited: Seventeen states have adopted law prohibiting the use of RCV in any elections.
- No laws addressing RCV, not in use: Twenty-two states have no laws addressing RCV, and neither the state nor any localities in the state use it.[9]
The map below shows which states use ranked-choice voting statewide or in some localities as of September 2025. It also shows the states where RCV is either prohibited or not addressed in the law. It does not show states where RCV is used by a political party for partisan primaries, or where military/UOCAVA voters use ranked ballots for runoff elections. See the table beneath the map for details on these uses of RCV.
Ranked-choice voting statewide ballot measures
Below is a list of statewide ranked-choice voting ballot measures by year. It includes measures that were approved, defeated, and not on the ballot between 2019 and 2024.
The following table provides a list of state ranked-choice voting (RCV) ballot measures:
| State | Year | Type | Measure | Position | Yes | No | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | 2024 | Initiative | Ballot Measure 2: Repeal Top-Four RCV Initiative | Anti-RCV | 49.88% | 50.12% | |
| Colorado | 2024 | Initiative | Proposition 131: Top-Four RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 46.47% | 53.53% | |
| Idaho | 2024 | Initiative | Proposition 1: Top-Four RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 30.38% | 69.62% | |
| Missouri | 2024 | Referral | Amendment 7: Require Citizenship to Vote and Prohibit RCV Amendment | Anti-RCV | 68.44% | 31.56% | |
| Nevada | 2024 | Initiative | Question 3: Top-Five RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 47.04% | 52.96% | |
| Oregon | 2024 | Referral | Measure 117: RCV for Federal and State Elections Measure | Pro-RCV | 42.30% | 57.70% | |
| Nevada | 2022 | Initiative | Question 3: Top-Five RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 52.94% | 47.06% | |
| Alaska | 2020 | Initiative | Ballot Measure 2: Top-Four RCV and Campaign Finance Laws Initiative | Pro-RCV | 50.55% | 49.45% | |
| Massachusetts | 2020 | Initiative | Question 2: RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 45.22% | 54.78% | |
| Maine | 2018 | Initiative | Question 1: Overturn RCV Delayed Enactment and Automatic Repeal Legislation Referendum | Pro-RCV | 53.88% | 46.12% | |
| Maine | 2016 | Initiative | Question 5: RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 52.12% | 47.88% | |
| Alaska | 2002 | Initiative | Ballot Measure 1: RCV Initiative | Pro-RCV | 36.27% | 63.73% | |
Campaign finance totals
The following table lists each measure's support and opposition campaign totals, if available.
Path to the ballot
Process in Oregon
A simple majority vote is required during one legislative session for the Oregon State Legislature to place a state statute on the ballot. That amounts to a minimum of 31 votes in the Oregon House of Representatives and 16 votes in the Oregon State Senate, assuming no vacancies. Statutes do not require the governor's signature to be referred to the ballot.
House Bill 2004 (2023)
The following is the timeline of the bill in the state legislature:
- January 9, 2023: The Oregon State Legislature introduced the measure as House Bill 2004 (HB 2004) in 2023.[1]
- May 23, 2023: The House voted 35-24 to approve HB 2004.[1]
- June 25, 2023: The Senate voted 17-8 to approve an amended version of the legislation. As HB 2004 was amended, a concurrence vote was required in the House. The House voted 34-17 to approve the final version of the bill, sending the ballot measure to voters in 2024.[1]
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in Oregon
See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Oregon.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Oregon State Legislature, "House Bill 2004," accessed June 26, 2023
- ↑ KTVZ, "Oregon lawmakers send ranked choice voting proposal to November 2024 ballot," June 25, 2023
- ↑ Oregon State Legislature, "Testimony," accessed July 6, 2023
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Oregon Votes, "Measure 115," accessed September 13, 2024
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ OregonRCV, "Home," accessed January 22, 2024
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedfinance - ↑ Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center, "Where is RCV Used," accessed January 17, 2023
- ↑ Michigan is included in this category despite numerous local jurisdictions approving the use of RCV. Although Michigan does not explicitly prohibit the use of RCV, state election laws prevent the implementation of RCV. One jurisdiction in the state, Eastpointe, did use RCV between 2019-2023 as a result of federal enforcement under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The jurisdictions of Ann Arbor, Ferndale, Kalamazoo, East Lansing, and Royal Oak have all authorized the use of RCV and plan to begin using the election method if legislation providing the state's authorization is signed into law.
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 Oregon Secretary of State, “Voting in Oregon,” accessed April 20, 2023
- ↑ Deschutes County Oregon, “Voting in Oregon FAQ,” accessed April 20, 2023
- ↑ Oregon.gov, "Public Elections Calendar, November 2024," accessed January 9, 2024
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 Oregon Secretary of State, "Oregon Online Voter Registration," accessed April 20, 2023
- ↑ Oregon Secretary of State, "Oregon Voter Registration Card," accessed November 2, 2024
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
 |
State of Oregon Salem (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
