In Alaska’s 2022 elections, the introduction of ranked choice voting (RCV) and jungle primaries led to dramatic changes, including increased election costs, reduced voter turnout, and significant shifts in political dynamics. The total cost of the election exceeded $11 million, representing a 328% increase compared to the elections from 2010 to 2020. Much of this spike was due to extensive voter education programs, the purchase of new voting equipment, and the complexities of ballot counting under RCV. These increased expenses have raised concerns about the long-term sustainability of RCV, especially in states like Alaska, where logistical challenges are already substantial.
Despite the heavy investment in voter education, turnout in Alaska’s 2022 election reached a historic low of 44.38%, the lowest in Alaska’s History. Voters were required to rank candidates in order of preference, a process that many found confusing, leading to ballot exhaustion—where votes for eliminated candidates are no longer counted in later rounds. Only about 70% of voters ranked multiple candidates, meaning many ballots were not factored into the final outcome, likely contributing to voter dissatisfaction and disengagement.
The jungle primary system, another new feature of Alaska’s election, further complicated the electoral landscape. In a jungle primary, all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, run in the same primary, with the top candidates advancing to the general election. Alaska saw a 700% increase in candidates in the U.S. House race, which led to vote dilution and encouraged intra-party conflict. Republican candidates Sarah Palin and Nick Begich, instead of focusing their campaigns against their Democratic opponent, Mary Peltola, ended up attacking each other, which ultimately fractured the Republican vote and allowed Peltola to win.
Despite the majority of voters initially supporting Republican candidates (110,875 voters compared to only 74,817 Democrats in the 2022 Special General Election), the internal conflict between Palin and Begich weakened their chances in the final outcome and resulted in Mary Peltola winning the U.S. House Election in Alaska, marking the first time in half a century that a Democrat held that seat.
Ranked choice voting was intended to prevent the “spoiler effect” by ensuring winners would have a majority of active votes. However, RCV’s system of eliminating candidates and reallocating votes does not always reflect the true majority of votes cast. When voters’ top choices are eliminated and their ballots no longer counted, the system results in a winner who may have received less than a majority of all votes cast. This was evident when Mary Peltola won despite Republicans garnering more total votes collectively. This raised concerns about the legitimacy and representativeness of RCV outcomes. In 2024, an incarcerated Democrat who currently resides in New York is a spoiler candidate for Rep. Peltola despite never stepping foot in Alaska. Due to the jungle primary and RCV, this person will be on Alaska’s General Election ballot for the U.S. House of Representatives.
Additionally, RCV was promoted as a system that would benefit third-party candidates by giving them a fairer shot in elections. However, the 2022 elections in Alaska and Maine demonstrated that third-party candidates did not see significant gains under RCV. Instead, the system appeared to reinforce the dominance of the two major parties, with most third-party candidates being eliminated early in the jungle primary. While RCV has been criticized for disproportionately benefiting Democrats, there are other high-profile Democrats like Gavin Newsom, the Colorado Democratic Party, Nevada Democratic Party, D.C. Democratic Party, and multiple NAACP members that have voiced opposition to the system.
The push for RCV in Alaska was also influenced by outside donors, raising concerns about the role of dark money in elections. Alaskan Democrats and establishment Republicans, particularly Senator Lisa Murkowski, were seen as benefiting from RCV, and out-of-state donors poured millions of dollars into pro-RCV campaigns. This outside influence sparked debate about whether RCV was being used as a tool to bypass the traditional Republican primary system. Many critics argue that RCV allows wealthy, out-of-state donors to have undue influence over election outcomes, a concern that has resonated beyond Alaska.
In Colorado, for example, Proposition 131 has sparked similar concerns. Colorado Democrats have strongly opposed the measure, warning that it could lead to the increased influence of unregulated dark money in elections. As one statement put it, “Prop 131 in Colorado asks Coloradans to throw out our excellent election system and get ranked choice voting and risk the possibility that unrestrained, dark money will play a more influential role in our state. The last thing we need are millionaires and billionaires controlling our elections.” This echoes the concerns raised in Alaska about the role of external financial influences in shaping election outcomes.
Despite the millions spent on promoting RCV in Alaska, there has been strong grassroots opposition to the system. Alaskans for Honest Elections, the group leading the repeal effort, successfully gathered more signatures than needed to place the repeal on the ballot. This overwhelming support for the repeal highlights the dissatisfaction many Alaskans feel toward the new election system, which they see as overly complicated and influenced by outside money.
Ranked choice voting brings increased costs, voter confusion, and the strategic manipulation of elections and has left many questioning the effectiveness of these reforms. Furthermore, the influence of dark money and outside donors has fueled opposition to RCV, not only in Alaska but also in other states like Colorado. As more states consider adopting RCV, the mixed results from Alaska offer a cautionary tale about the potential pitfalls of this electoral system.
—
Phil Izon is the author of the Repeal of Ranked Choice Voting in Alaska, leading the effort with the most signatures in a single day (580) and most by an individual (2,000). Phil worked with over 400+ volunteers collecting over 42,000 signatures across the largest state in the country. He has also written multiple books on the topic of elections, participated in debates in 5 States with Alaska & Oregon Legislators, RCV advocates, and even Presidential Candidate Chase Oliver.
