Explore a curated collection of standout articles, research, and commentary from our team and trusted partners.
Writings in Scholarly Publications
How Ranked Choice Voting Could Improve Presidential Elections
National Civic Review (2024)
The Case for Instant Runoff Voting
Constitutional Political Economy (2023)
Lessons from the Use of Ranked Choice Voting in American Presidential Primaries
Cogitatio Press (2021)
Harvard Law and Policy Journal (2020)
University of Richmond Law Review (2013)
How the 2012 Presidential Election Has Strengthened the Movement for the National Popular Vote Plan
Presidential Studies Quarterly (2013)
Instant Runoff Voting: What Mexico (and Others) Could Learn
Election Law Journal (2004)
The Case for Proportional Representation
Boston Review (1998)
Shorter Writings
Selected New York Times Op-Eds and Archive:
Selected Washington Post Op-Eds and Archive:
Archive of publications in The Fulcrum
Archive of publications in Huffington Post
Featured Media Appearances
Rob Richie's 25+ appearances on CSPAN Television
Interviews with:
Peer-Reviewed Articles and Chapters
Is Ranked Choice Voting associated with Turnout across race and ethnic groups?
Social Science Quarterly (2025)
Does Ranked Choice Voting Increase Turnout and Mobilization?
Electoral Studies (2024)
Belief in Election Fraud in the 2020 Election: An Analysis of Partisans, Leaners, and Independents.
Forthcoming. In M. Ritter, ed. Rising Above Conspiracy: Understanding Elections, Election Administration, and Democracy in America and Abroad in the 2020s. De Gruyter Press.
Policy Reports
What We Know About Ranked Choice Voting, Updated for 2025
American Bar Association Task Force for American Democracy (2025)
Why Not Just Call RCV Runoff Elections?
The Fulcrum (2025)
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation
The Fulcrum (2025)
Ranked Choice Voting and Election Management
Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center (2024)
Shaky Political "Science" Misses Mark on Ranked Choice Voting
Steven Hill & Paul Haughey, 2025
This paper critically examines 40 studies on RCV, highlighting that many critiques rely on flawed methodologies rather than empirical election data. The authors emphasize the importance of grounding RCV research in real-world electoral outcomes.