Vermont bill H.424 "An act relating to town, city, and village elections for single-seat offices using ranked-choice voting" differs from the usual RCV bills and ballot measures around the country because it uses Condorcet's method to count the ballots instead of the usual Hare's method.
I personally think this is a far superior method and hope it becomes law, but have no idea whether it has a chance or not.
Here's what it says about the current status:
Last Recorded Action
House 2/28/2023 - Read first time and referred to the Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs
Committee Meetings
Regular Session 2023-2024
Meeting Date: Thursday, April 13, 2023
Committee: House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs
Related questions
So, the decision was made by the legislator (and my friend), who introduced H.424, and the legislative counsel, who wrote the language, to go with Condorcet-Plurality instead of BTR-IRV. If we were to go to a technically better method, I think it would be Ranked-Pairs, but even RP was scary legislative language. Schulze even moreso. And even simple as it is, H.424 is going nowhere.
@PlasmaBallin Yes! I don't know what kind of chances it has though, or how to make it more likely to happen.
Kinda? It's decent in theory but unclear how good it would be in practice. The issue is Condorcet//Plurality is easy to game in some elections, by burying the Condorcet winner (rank them last on your ballot). This creates a fake cycle, at which point the plurality winner wins. So, if you have a situation like Alaska 2022, there's a strong incentive for Democrats to bury the compromise candidate (Begich). A Condorcet-IRV variant would've been a lot nicer, because the strategy tends to get a lot harder.