PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE HAWAII STATE CONSTITUTION TO REQUIRE RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IN ELECTIONS AND ELIMINATE PRIMARY ELECTIONS.
HB2528 proposes a constitutional amendment to require ranked-choice voting for all Hawaii elections and to eliminate primary elections. The bill would move candidate selection into the general election process, with voters ranking candidates by preference and the winner in single-seat races required to secure a majority after tabulation. It also states that special elections using ranked-choice voting would be limited to one contest, with no separate runoff election.
The measure amends multiple provisions of the Hawaii State Constitution, including the sections governing voting, election timing, legislative elections, and qualifications of members. It removes references to primary elections, deletes the constitutional requirement that a candidate can be deemed elected at a primary when unopposed, and updates related language tied to nomination papers and reapportionment timing. If adopted, it would change the state’s election framework from a primary-plus-general system to a general-election-only system for candidate selection, while preserving absentee voting, ballot secrecy, and party affiliation protections.
The bill’s stated rationale is that Hawaii’s current primary system has low turnout, costs more than $5 million to administer, and can produce winners with only plurality support in crowded races. The findings also argue that ranked-choice voting would reduce the spoiler effect, encourage broader candidate participation, and produce more majority-supported winners. The bill cites Hawaii’s existing use of ranked-choice voting in certain special elections under Act 47 (2022) as evidence that the system is already partially in use.
Overall sentiment in the bill text is strongly favorable toward ranked-choice voting and strongly critical of the current primary system. The framing emphasizes higher participation, lower costs, more representative outcomes, and less negative campaigning. No committee transcript or vote record is available in the provided material, so there is no recorded legislative debate or formal vote sentiment beyond the bill’s own findings.
The main point of contention implied by the proposal is the elimination of primary elections and the replacement of a familiar nomination process with ranked-choice voting in the general election. Potential concerns include the impact on party nomination structures, voter understanding of ranked-choice tabulation, and the constitutional and administrative changes needed to implement the new system statewide. Supporters, as reflected in the bill text, appear to be those favoring electoral reform, broader voter participation, and majority-based outcomes.
If enacted, HB2528 would amend the Hawaii State Constitution and require statewide ranked-choice voting for elections, while removing constitutional references to primary elections. It would alter election administration, candidate nomination and election timing rules, and related legislative eligibility provisions that currently reference primaries. The bill would affect voters, candidates, election administrators, and political parties by shifting the decisive contest to the general election and eliminating the separate primary stage.
The bill’s tone and findings are clearly supportive of ranked-choice voting and unfavorable toward the current primary system. It presents the reform as more democratic, cost-effective, and representative, citing low primary turnout, high administrative costs, and the benefits of majority winners. No committee testimony or votes were provided, so the available sentiment is limited to the bill’s own pro-reform framing.
The central controversy is whether Hawaii should eliminate primary elections and replace them with ranked-choice voting in all elections. Likely concerns include the loss of the traditional party primary process, the complexity of implementing and explaining ranked-choice voting, and possible effects on party organization and candidate strategy. Supporters emphasize turnout, cost savings, and majority support, while opponents would likely focus on administrative burden, voter confusion, and the disruption of established election practices.