A functioning democracy is essential to tackling any large-scale issue.

A supermajority of Americans wants more climate action. And yes, there's been progress, especially here in Cascadia. Yet laws in the United States are still not aligned with public sentiment on climate and many other issues.

That's because our democracy isn't functioning as it should.

One could blame individual elected leaders for their foibles. But perceiving everyone to be at fault - "fire everyone and start fresh," as one recent US survey respondent summarized - is more productively interpreted as a nudge to explore the structures that incentivize politicians to act the way they do.

With that framing, it's clear that candidates that get elected into office aren't always the most responsive to the will of the people. Limited voter participation means that politicians tend to primarily attend to the desires of people who actually vote, who aren't representative of the overall public (especially in lower-turnout elections like those in odd-numbered years and primaries).

Some primary elections intentionally exclude voters, creating candidates who are accountable only to a narrow partisan base. When more than two people run, there's a good chance that one of them will be elected without majority support, and candidates find easy ways to game the system to gain political power. (Sightline has a whole book covering these systemic flaws - and solutions to fix them.)

Stymied climate policy action is what got Sightline into democracy and elections issues in the first place. Since then, Sightline has extensively researched election topics from money in politics to voter registration to proportional representation.

So how might some of these electoral reforms help us make bigger, faster progress on reducing emissions and adapting to a changing climate?

This article will focus on ranked choice voting, one electoral upgrade that's been gaining attention and traction nationwide - but anything we do to build a more representative and functional democracy will likely offer similar benefits to climate policy as those listed here. And while assessing the causes of policy change is notoriously difficult, there are plenty of reasons why ranked choice voting could help climate policy take off.

How ranked choice voting can accelerate climate action

1) Majority-supported leaders put majority views first

Most Americans want more progress on climate action, so anything that makes our democracy more representative will likely help expedite policy action on the issue.

Ranked choice voting better aligns politicians with their constituents because the victor of a (single-winner) ranked choice voting election has to earn more than 50 percent of the votes. So leaders elected under ranked choice voting are much more likely to represent the views of the people in their community than those elected under plurality pick-one voting, who might have very little support (especially if they were elected in a primary).

If elected leaders have better incentives to listen to their constituents' concerns about climate change, for example, they might be more likely to punish toxic spills, update building codes, and advance clean energy.

2) Third parties such as the Green Party can showcase their support

Ranked choice voting reduces entry barriers for third-party candidates, including those focused on specific issues. A Green Party candidate, for example, can run without fear of taking votes away from a similarly positioned major-party candidate, because voters who choose the Green Party candidate first can have their second choice count if their first choice doesn't get enough initial votes.

In a ranked choice voting election, environmentally focused candidates can also bolster their platform by demonstrating their level of support to the candidate who does win. Say there are three candidates running - a Democrat, a Republican, and a Green Party candidate. If the Green Party candidate wins 20 pe...