Proportional representation in the United States

Proportional representation (PR) in the United States refers to the multi-winner electoral systems, usually single transferable vote, used in several cities historically and currently in the US. Several electoral reform groups have advocated for the use of proportional representation to elect Congressmembers, instead of the current winner-take-all plurality system.

The Proportional Representation League advocated for the use of single transferable vote (STV), a ranked-choice, proportional vote system, in cities in the 1890s^[1] and the early 20th century.^[2] The league preferred at-large proportional representation as opposed to district models.^[3]

Between 1915 and 1962, 22 cities used STV, including Cincinnati, Sacramento, and most notably New York City.^[4] The first city to use PR the US was Ashtabula, Ohio in 1915 via referendum. Kalamazoo, Michigan used PR for two elections before the Supreme Court of Michigan overturned the system.^[3]

Instructions for how to vote for Baruch Charney Vladeck, a member of the American Labor Party in the 1937 New York City Council election. The political ad was run in the New York Daily News, November 1, 1937.

In the wake of the Walker scandal, Fiorello La Guardia advocated for a successful referendum to replace gerrymandered districts with STV.^[5]

New York City's first election using PR was in 1937. The city used a quota system, wherein each borough was entitled to one councilmember for every 75,000 votes cast (plus one more for a remainder of 50,000 or more).^[6] Ballot guides were widely distributed during the election, and the system was credited for making it easier to prevent vote tampering and a having a higher percentage of votes going to elect a candidate than the previous single-member district system.^[7]

Proportional representation fell out of favor and began to be repealed after racial and political minorities began to win seats.^[2]

Currently, multi-member elections for Congress are banned under the Uniform Congressional District Act.^[8][9] The act was intended to ban general tickets (a type of block voting),^[10] which had been controversial since the 1840s,^[11] but it also banned proportional systems.

Multiple cities use proportional representation to elect their city councils,^[5] including Portland, Minneapolis, Charlottesville, and Cambridge.^[12] Portland's form of STV elects candidates who reach a victory threshold, but it does not ensure party proportional representation due to the races being formally nonpartisan.^[13] Portland first used STV in its 2024 city council election.

United States House of Representatives seats are elected by plurality vote (whoever gets the most votes wins). House seats in Maine and Alaska use ranked-choice voting (RCV) instead of plurality voting.^[14] Since the 1960s, all House congressional districts have been single-member districts.^[15]

Since 1913, after the ratification of the 17th Amendment, US senators have been elected by plurality vote in at-large, statewide elections.^[16] Some states use runoffs^[17] or RCV^[14] instead to elect senators by a majority instead of a plurality. According to a 1992 DOJ memorandum opinion, Senate races must be at-large and may not be broken into two single-member district races.^[18]

Reform groups such as FairVote,^[19] Protect Democracy,^[20] and Fix Our House advocate for proportional representation for federal races.

Every Congressional session since the 115th United States Congress, Congressman Don Beyer has introduced the Fair Representation Act,^[21][22] which would split states into multi-member districts that would elect 3-5 representatives using STV, similar to the Dáil Éireann (lower house in Ireland). Representative Sean Casten's Equal Voices Act would expand the size of the House of Representatives and allow for the optional use of multi-member districts.^[23][24][25]

The ProRep Coalition advocates for use of proportional representation in the California state legislature,^[26] citing increasing poverty, perceived lack of representation for left-of-center ideas in the Democratic Party, and lack of Republican influence on state legislation.^[27] The coalition consists of third parties such as the Green Party, Libertarian Party, Forward California, and the American Solidarity Party,^[28] as well as advocacy groups such as Represent Women, Californians for Electoral Reform, and Cal RCV.^[28]

In January 2026, House Republicans introduced the Make Elections Great Again Act, which would prohibit ranked-choice voting for federal elections (prohibiting STV) and prohibit any federal system that "permits a voter to vote for more than one candidate for the same office."^[29][30] No modern federal Republican politician has endorsed federal legislation to enact proportional representation.^[31]

New York University School of Law professor Richard Pildes argued that political tensions are not inherent to first-past-the-post (FPTP) systems and that Brexit was an aberrance in the political climate of the United Kingdom. He also questioned how many parties would form without reform to the Senate. Pildes suggested state legislature multi-member district (MMD) reform efforts to be a better starting place than federal races and recommended nonpartisan reforms to the primary process.^[32]

In New York City, under STV, 80% of legislation was passed unanimously.^[33] In the 1939 election, Genevieve Earle formed a multiracial women's committee to attempt to elect a Black candidate that she had beaten the previous election. Commentators said this showed no resentment between the two.^[33]

PR prevented vote splitting and undermined the effects of political machines in cities that used it in the 1920s.^[3]

Proponents of federal proportional representation argue it could give more electoral sway to minority groups who do not currently live in majority-minority districts. PR may also expand national focus from swing races to unrepresented groups, such as Republicans in Democratic Congressional districts.^[31]

PR elections could introduce three or more political parties to Congress, requiring collaborative coalitions to elect a Speaker of the House.^[34][31][32]

• 1993 New Zealand electoral reform referendum
• Electoral reform in the United States
• Proportional representation in the United Kingdom