POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Did Not Advance

Connecticut bill authorizes ranked-choice voting for party primaries, conventions, and municipal elections starting in 2028

Original title: AN ACT CONCERNING THE USE OF RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IN PARTY CAUCUSES, CONVENTIONS AND PRIMARIES, INCLUDING PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARIES, AND IN CERTAIN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS.

Last action · April 14, 2026: Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, SenateSponsors: Laurie Sweet and 17 others

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Proposed

Beginning January 1, 2028, political parties and municipalities in Connecticut are permitted to use for primary elections, presidential preference primaries, municipal elections, and party conventions. The Secretary of the State is required to prescribe ballot layouts, issue implementation instructions, and establish delegate allocation formulas for ranked-choice contests.

Why it matters

Local governments and political parties gain the legal option to change how candidates are selected and elected, altering ballot design and vote tabulation methods for voters starting in 2028.

Background
  • Ranked-choice voting allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference rather than choosing only one. context
  • The General Assembly regularly considers legislative measures modifying election laws and party primary procedures in Connecticut. context

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Municipalities

Municipalities are granted the option to adopt ranked-choice voting for local elections via a referendum.

Directly affected

Political parties

Political parties may incorporate ranked-choice voting into their party rules for caucuses, conventions, and primaries.

Directly affected

Secretary of the State

The Secretary of the State must prescribe ballot types, issue implementation instructions, adopt regulations, and calculate delegate allocations.

Key Facts

  • Ranked-choice voting is authorized starting January 1, 2028, for primaries, presidential preference primaries, and municipal elections where electors elect no more than one candidate.
  • Municipalities may adopt ranked-choice voting for municipal elections by a vote of the electors at a referendum.
  • Major political parties may adopt ranked-choice voting for primaries and convention endorsements pursuant to their party rules.
  • The Secretary of the State is directed to prescribe ballot types, instructions, layout, and orientation for ranked-choice elections.
Show all 9 facts
  • In multi-round tabulation for single-winner offices, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated in each round and their votes transferred until an active candidate achieves a majority or fewer than three active candidates remain.
  • If a tie occurs between candidates with the least number of votes, the candidate to be eliminated is determined by lot.
  • Polls for primaries conducted under the act must remain open between six o'clock a.m. and eight o'clock p.m.
  • Moderators failing to deliver head moderator returns by the specified deadline must pay a late filing fee of fifty dollars.
  • Convention secretaries must record and preserve round-by-round tabulation results at the state central committee headquarters for 180 days.

Frequently Asked Questions

How can a municipality adopt ranked-choice voting?
A municipality may adopt by a vote of the electors at a municipal referendum.
What happens if a ballot contains skipped or repeated rankings?
The vote on such a ballot is tabulated for the highest-ranked .

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Tabled in the Senate.

Procedural history

15 actions
  1. Apr 14, 2026Senate
    Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
  2. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    No New File by Committee on Appropriations
  3. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners' Office
  4. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Filed with Legislative Commissioners' Office
  5. Apr 13, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Joint Favorable
  6. Apr 8, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Immediate Transmittal to Committee on Appropriations
Show 9 earlier actions
  1. Mar 30, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    File Number 227
  2. Mar 30, 2026Senate
    Senate Calendar Number 182
  3. Mar 30, 2026Senate
    Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
  4. Mar 30, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners' Office
  5. Mar 23, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 03/30/26 12:00 PM
  6. Mar 12, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Filed with Legislative Commissioners' Office
  7. Mar 11, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Joint Favorable Substitute
  8. Feb 27, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Public Hearing 03/04
  9. Feb 26, 2026Connecticut General AssemblyCommittee
    Referred to Joint Committee on Government Administration and Elections

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift98% confidence

Introduction of Ranked-Choice Voting Framework

The bill introduces comprehensive statutory definitions and mechanics for ranked-choice voting across primaries, municipal elections, and party conventions in Connecticut.

Connected Entities

Jane M. Garibay, Laurie Sweet, Michael 'MJ' Shannon and 10 more
PersonJane M. Garibay“Representative, 60th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonLaurie Sweet“Representative, 91st Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonMichael 'MJ' Shannon“Representative, 117th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonSteven Winter“Representative, 94th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonNicholas Menapace“Representative, 37th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonAundre Bumgardner“Representative, 41st Dist., cosponsor”Map →
OrganizationGeneral Assembly“Legislative body passing Substitute Bill No. 386”Map →
PersonMary M. Mushinsky“Representative, 85th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonJosh Elliott“Representative, 88th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
PersonNick Gauthier“Representative, 38th Dist., cosponsor”Map →
OrganizationGovernment Administration and Elections Committee“Committee sponsoring Senate Bill 386”Map →
OrganizationSecretary of the State“Responsible for prescribing ballots, adopting regulations, and calculating deleg”Map →
PersonPaul Honig“Senator, 8th Dist., cosponsor”Map →

Sources

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 75)
  • Controversy60
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz45
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record