Dropouts, doppelgangers, and convicted felons have tested Alaska’s unique election system this cycle.
Alaska saw a host of election hijinks in the primaries for its statewide races. Two candidates named Dan Sullivan appeared on the ballot for Senate after a prolonged legal battle. In the governor’s race, Democrat Tom Begich dropped out of the race to clear a path for fellow Dem Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins. Another Democrat, Matt Schultz, dropped out of the state’s lone House race to give independent candidate Bill Hill more room to contend. Eric Hafner, a convicted felon serving a 20-year prison sentence in New York, also appeared on the ballot as a House candidate.
Alaska uses ranked-choice voting and holds all-party primaries in which the top four candidates advance to the general election. Proponents of the system say it maximizes representation and gives voters more agency, while critics argue the system can be exploited by partisans. Alaska’s system is unique, though Maine also uses ranked-choice voting and California and Washington use all-party primaries.
Critics have said the system is too complex and not transparent enough. Nineteen states have banned ranked-choice voting, and thanks to this past summer’s brouhaha, Alaska might be the next to do away with it. A measure on the ballot this November seeks to repeal ranked-choice voting, the all-party primary, and campaign finance disclosure rules, which Alaskans initially approved in a sweeping 2020 ballot measure. Voters rejected a similar ballot measure repealing ranked-choice voting and open primaries in 2024 by just 737 votes.
This time around, Repeal Now, the campaign to repeal Alaska’s voting system, has more capital. It has raised over $1.5 million to date, compared to the opposing campaign’s roughly $5.8 million. During the 2024 cycle, the repeal campaign raised just $150,000, compared to opponents’ $15 million.
Repeal Now received $1 million from the Aurora Action Network, a Wisconsin-based super PAC that itself received $1.5 million from Elon Musk and has received contributions from conservative megadonors Dick Uihlein and Jeff Yass. "No On 2," the campaign against the repeal, received roughly $3.8 million from Unite America PAC and $1.5 million from Voters for the American Center, Inc.
“I think that ranked-choice voting is on life support,” said Greg Powers, a general consultant with Repeal Now. “I think they’re going to have a tough time defending it this time around.”
Defenders of the ranked-choice system say Alaskans understand how it works and it allows a majority of citizens to meaningfully participate in choosing their representatives. The all-party primary system predates the states. Alaska adopted a blanket primary in 1947, when the Last Frontier was still a territory.
State Senate Majority Leader Cathy Giessel, a Republican, told National Journal the system allows candidates to succeed without relying on support from a political party.
“For the candidates, the open primary requires them to be available, to actually go to all Alaskans, because every Alaskan's vote counts,” Giessel said. “It’s not just the political party.”
A May New York Times/Siena poll showed 43 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with both political parties, and voters’ disapproval of Congress has peaked in recent months.
"The majority of Americans are tired of a two-party system with extremists and want to see real work get done by legislators who are willing to roll up their sleeves and come to the table," said Juli Lucky, executive director of Alaskans for Better Elections.
The jungle-primary system can give voters a slew of options. In Alaska the governor’s race drew 17 candidates, while in California more than 60 gubernatorial candidates appeared on the ballot.
“This is about people finding a connection to a candidate, even if the candidate is the person who placed 10th,” said outgoing Alaska AFL-CIO president Joelle Hall, who serves on the executive committee of No On 2.
Partisans have appeared prominently in Alaska’s primaries this year. The Alaskan Republican Party labeled Dan J. Sullivan, the candidate sharing the name with the incumbent senator, a Democratic plant and kicked off a legal firestorm attempting to remove him from the ballot. Democrats Schultz and Begich dropped out of their races to give others a better chance of success. Super PACs spent more than $2 million boosting lesser-known candidates in the Senate race in Alaska to split the field.
The system’s defenders say candidates will always attempt to exploit the system in which they run, and jungle primaries are no different.
“I don’t think I’ve seen an election that there wasn’t an effort to game it,” Giessel said. “That’s human nature. People try to game who they bet on for a horse race.”
Voter Rights MA committee chair Jordan Berg Powers, whose group is fighting a ballot measure that would institute a top-two primary in Massachusetts, argues that all-party primaries incentivize partisans to support the candidate most likely to win, not necessarily the candidate they prefer. He said that a conventional partisan primary can allow partisans to ideologically battle knowing that no matter what, someone they at least somewhat support will advance to the general election.
“Parties are a way for people to organize themselves into ideological bases and then to have those ideological bases duel out in a general election,” Berg Powers said.
Partisan maneuvering in all-party primaries has occurred outside Alaska. In California, Democratic politicians have strategically uplifted Republicans in all-party primaries to avoid facing a Democrat in the general election. During his 2024 campaign, Sen. Adam Schiff and his allies spent $11.2 million to boost Steve Garvey, a Republican, in order to box out his Democratic rival, Katie Porter. In 2018, Gavin Newsom eventually won the governor’s race by attacking Republican John Cox, elevating his name recognition so he surpassed Antonio Villaraigosa, a Democrat, in the primary.
Critics say partisans can exploit the open primary system by strategically voting for a nonthreatening candidate to compete alongside their top pick in the general election.
“When you have all the people, all the parties on one ballot, and Democrats and Republicans are allowed to vote on who the nominee might be for the other party, then you’re going to get strategic voting,” Powers of Repeal Now said. “People are smart.”
