Here’s what I’m seeing on my social media feeds as voters wrestle with some of the most crowded races in Illinois history: “My ballot has been sitting on my desk completely filled out except for the congressional candidate. I’ve never been so undecided this late into an election cycle.” “Strategy is why I’m voting for candidate A for the House. We have to stop candidate A and candidate B.” “I like candidate A for Senate, but it’ll probably be candidate B. Can you talk me out of voting for candidate A?” And, “Not excited by candidate A, but will probably vote for him.”
It’s no wonder voters are increasingly frustrated by their choices on the March 17 Democratic primary ballot. With 15 candidates running for Congress in the 9th District, 13 in the 7th District and 10 in the 2nd District, well-informed voters are coming to the realization that their vote will be most effective if they consider how their vote could help stop the candidate they don’t want, rather than backing the candidate they think will best serve their community. In this scenario, establishment candidates and those with the most money have a clear advantage, and newcomers have the highest hill to climb.
Do we still consider ours a “fair” election? I’m not so sure.
Consider the pressure on low-polling and underfunded candidates (usually those newest to the process). The self-proclaimed progressives vying for the 2nd District seat all reportedly poll in single digits. If they don’t step back to help coalesce the considerable progressive vote in that district, the likely result will be a better-funded, establishment-backed candidate no progressive voters want. The crowded field lowers the bar for those party regulars who could take this primary (and, the seat in Congress) with a total considerably less than a majority — likely only a quarter or fewer of votes cast.
In the 2nd District, the reported front-runner is former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., who served 17 years before resigning in disgrace when he and his City Council wife were convicted of tax fraud related to campaign funds used for personal luxuries. Jackson could well emerge the winner on the basis of name recognition and the goodwill generated by his father, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, whose recent death further boosts the Jackson name in local headlines.
In the 9th District, a concentration of Jewish voters are debating the implications of dark money donations to Rep. Laura Fine from a political action committee affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Polls show she’s in a tight race with Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss likely due, in part, to the PAC’s harsh ads against Biss. Although Biss has the endorsement of beloved incumbent Jan Schakowsky, the beneficiary of an overly crowded field could be Kat Abughazaleh, a social media influencer who gained notoriety when she was indicted on charges related to a protest at the immigrant detention facility in Broadview. Although the U.S. Department of Justice has so far failed to convict a single protester related to activities in the Chicago area, this indictment may well overshadow the fact she only moved to Chicago in 2024 and into the 9th District once she announced her intention to seek the congressional seat.
Although attention in the Illinois race for U.S. Senate focuses on the three top contenders, there are seven others in the race; each can pull a small percentage of voters to distort the outcome in this race, too.
The candidate with the most votes in a congressional race — no matter how few — will be the winner of the Democratic primary, which generally determines the winner in November as well. This means Illinois can expect to seat new members of Congress with meager voter support, unless a record number of candidates choose to drop out and endorse another in the remaining weeks of this election. Even if candidates do coalesce, ballots are printed and early voting underway, so the opportunity to influence an outcome in this way is fading fast.
But why should the system put this pressure on (mostly) newcomers who want to serve? Why should voters have a limited choice in a field with abundant options?
This ballot is the best argument I’ve seen for ranked choice voting, or RCV.
RCV allows voters to state their second, third and sometimes more choices in a crowded field. If no candidate gets 50%, the lowest candidate is dropped, and their supporters’ votes go to their second choice. That tally is repeated until one candidate gets over 50% of the vote.
The benefits go beyond leveling the playing field and easing voter frustration, according to a comprehensive review by Fair Vote, the national group promoting RCV:
• Voters in RCV jurisdictions are 17% more likely to turn out for municipal elections than those in non-RCV jurisdictions, according to a 2024 study.
• Youth turnout in RCV cities was higher than youth turnout in non-RCV cities, according to a 2021 study by researchers in Iowa and Wisconsin.
• And, despite fears that RCV discourages voters of color, a 2025 study finds that, “If anything, our results suggest that people from each race/ethnic group examined here had higher rates of turnout in RCV cities than these groups had in other places.”
So, why don’t we have RCV in Illinois? It’s been approved in several communities, including Evanston, Skokie and Oak Park, but lawsuits are stalling implementation. While legal challenges wind their way through state courts, lawmakers are trying to clarify the Illinois election code to make it easier to implement RCV.
Voters, let’s contact our representatives and urge them to get this job done in the current legislative session. It’ll give us a system that encourages and supports more candidates to run while giving voters more power in a crowded field, replacing the current system that weakens candidates and frustrates voters.
Marj Halperin is an award-winning journalist and former Democratic analyst for WGN-Ch. 9. She can be heard on WGN Radio’s “Mincing Rascals” podcast.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
