their favorite candidate is eliminated, and the votes 
of the candidate’s supporters count for their second 
choice in a runoff round. This process continues 
until one candidate earns a majority of votes. 
(7) By allowing voters to rank candidates, rath-
er than choose just one, candidates are encouraged 
to engage in positive campaigning in order to receive 
a higher ranking from their opponents’ supporters. 
(8) There is increased interest in instant runoff 
voting. For example, the system has been approved 
for use by voters in San Francisco, California, be-
ginning with the 2004 municipal elections. In 1999, 
the New Mexico Senate passed legislation providing 
for a ballot measure under which voters would be al-
lowed to implement instant runoff voting for Presi-
dential elections. In Vermont, legislation to enact in-
stant runoff voting for statewide offices, including 
the Presidential race, has been endorsed by Common 
Cause, the League of Women Voters, and the 
Grange. Additionally, the legislatures of States such 
as Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington in 
2001 debated legislation to enact instant runoff vot-
ing for Presidential elections, and the Speaker of the 
California Assembly has introduced a bill to imple-
ment instant runoff voting in elections to fill vacan-
cies in Congress. 
(9) In order to conduct an instant runoff elec-
tion, voting equipment must be compatible with bal-
lots that allow voters to rank candidates. 
(10) A majority of states currently conduct two-
round runoff elections in some of their statewide, 
county, and municipal elections. Two-round elections 
cost the states millions of dollars each year and re-
sult in severe drop-offs in voter turnout. Voting 
equipment that is compatible with ranked ballots will 
give states, counties, and municipalities the option of 
saving millions of dollars and boosting voter turnout 
by consolidating two-round runoffs into one election. 
(11) Consistent with the national underinvest-
ment in voting equipment, much of the Nation’s vot-
ing equipment is not currently compatible with 
ranked ballots. 
(12) There are currently no Federal mandatory 
minimum standards for voting equipment. Although 
the Federal Election Commission has promulgated 
voluntary standards, these voluntary standards do 
not include compatibility with ranked ballots.
(13) The operation of our current voting and 
election system is run by approximately 13,000 sepa-
rate and unequally administered voting jurisdictions. 
(14) National polls have shown that the Amer-
ican people support a voting system that is unitary. 
SEC. 3. REQUIRING USE OF INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING FOR 
GENERAL ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL OFFICE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of law, each State shall conduct general elections for 
Federal office held in the State during 2008 and each suc-
ceeding year using an instant runoff voting system, and 
shall ensure that the voting equipment and technology 
used to conduct the elections is compatible with such a 
system. 
(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this Act, the following defini-
tions apply: 
(1) The term ‘‘Federal office’’ has the meaning 
given such term in section 301(3) of the Federal 
Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(3)). 
(2) The term ‘‘instant runoff voting system’’ 
means a system for the election of candidates under 
which—
(A) runoff counts of candidates are con-
ducted in rounds;
(B) voters may rank candidates on the bal-
lot according to the order of preference; 
(C) if in any round no candidate receives 
a majority of the votes cast, the candidate with 
the fewest number of votes is eliminated and 
the remaining candidates advance to the next 
round; 
(D) in each round, a voter shall be consid-
ered to have cast one vote for the candidate the 
voter ranked highest on the ballot who has not 
been eliminated; and 
(E) the runoff counts are carried out auto-
matically at the time the votes are cast and tab-
ulated. 
(3) The term ‘‘State’’ includes the District of 
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Amer-
ican Samoa, Guam, and the United States Virgin Is-
lands. 
SEC. 4. GRANTS TO STATES TO DEFRAY COSTS OF ADMIN-
ISTERING INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING SYSTEM. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF GRANT PROGRAM.—There is 
established a program under which the Election Assist-
ance Commission (hereafter in this Act referred to as the 
‘‘Commission’’) shall make grants to eligible States to de-
fray the costs of administering an instant runoff voting
system, including the costs of purchasing voting equip-
ment, software, and other technology necessary for such 
a system. 
(b) PLAN FOR PROGRAM.—Not later than 60 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commis-
sion shall develop and make public a plan describing the 
criteria to be used in the solicitation and approval of appli-
cations for grants under this Act and the criteria to be 
used in overseeing the use of funds provided under such 
grants, except that under such criteria the Commission 
may not require a State to match any portion of the 
amount awarded as a condition of eligibility. 
(c) ELIGIBILITY OF STATES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—A State is eligible to receive 
a grant under the program under this section if it 
submits to the Commission (in such form and man-
ner as the Commission may require) an application 
containing such information and assurances as the 
Commission may require. 
(2) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION.—The Com-
mission may not consider an application for a grant 
under this section unless the application is sub-
mitted prior to the expiration of the 60-day period 
which begins on the date the Commission makes 
public the plan developed under subsection (b).
(3) DEADLINE FOR RESPONSE.—The Commis-
sion shall approve or reject an application submitted 
under this subsection not later than 120 days after 
receiving the application. 
(4) CRITERIA FOR REJECTION.—The Commis-
sion may not reject an application submitted under 
this subsection unless it finds that—
(A) the equipment, software, or other tech-
nology used to administer elections in the State 
is not compatible with an instant runoff voting 
system; or 
(B) the State does not provide for appro-
priate education for voters, poll workers, and 
election officials in the use of an instant runoff 
voting system. 
(d) CAP ON AMOUNT OF GRANT.—The amount of 
any grant awarded to a State under the program under 
this section may not exceed the product of—
(1) the number of residents in the State at the 
time the grant is awarded (based on the most recent 
decennial census); and 
(2) $12. 
(e) AUTHORIZATION
OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 
are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the pro-
gram under this section—