Contact: Robyn Sundlee, Sightline Institute, robyn@sightline.org
Sightline Institute does not support or oppose any candidate, political party, or Alaska ballot measure. Sightline has researched democratic systems for over 30 years and published extensive independent research and analysis on Alaska’s election model.
JUNEAU, ALASKA – Purportedly nonserious or strategically motivated “spoiler” candidates are not a new phenomenon—they have shown up on ballots long before Alaska’s 2020 electoral reforms.
Some might misperceive Alaska’s voting system as an easy target for spoilers. On the contrary, the ranked choice voting method that Alaskans use in their general elections reduces spoiler impacts. Unlike in pick-one elections, voters don’t have to worry about “wasting” their vote on a lesser-known candidate, because their vote will count for their next-best choice if their top pick doesn’t do well.
Under Alaska’s system of ranked choice voting and open primaries, Sightline researchers have found that elections are more competitive, independents are breaking through, and lawmakers are working across the aisle more often than pre-reform.
Sightline recommends two additional policies to protect Alaskans’ ability to support their true candidate preferences.
- Smarter filing fees and signature rules could curb nonserious candidates or overcrowded races. The fee to run for US Congress is $100 in Alaska but $1,740 in Montana—more than 17 times as much.
- Letting parties mark their endorsed candidates on ballots would better inform voters who find party nominations helpful. Currently, Alaska ballots list candidates’ chosen parties but not parties’ chosen candidates.
“Alaskans’ system neutralizes strategic gameplay better than pick-one elections,” said Robyn Sundlee, a Juneau-based Senior Researcher at Sightline Institute. “Clear party labels and reasonable filing requirements would further minimize uncertainty.”
More Sightline analysis:
- No More 48-Candidate Races | Reasonable filing fees would help voters, parties, and serious contenders alike in Alaska and Portland.
- A Two-Word Fix for Alaska’s Ballot Confusion | Letting parties tag their nominees would make Alaska’s elections clearer, fairer, and harder to hijack by disingenuous candidates.
- Ballot Measure 2 Would Allow Dark Money Back into Alaska’s Elections | In addition to ranked choice voting and open primaries, the measure would dismantle many of the state’s campaign finance transparency laws.
- Ballot Analysis: From Peltola to Begich, Ranked Choice Voting Delivered What Alaskans Wanted | Cross-party appeal elevated Alaska’s former and current US representatives.
- Post-Reform, Alaskan Elections Are More Competitive | That’s good news for Alaskans of all political stripes—and an example for voters elsewhere of how to get more choice at their own ballot box.
###
Sightline Institute is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit think tank providing leading original analysis of democracy, energy, and housing policy in the Pacific Northwest, Alaska, British Columbia, and beyond.
Robyn Sundlee is a Senior Researcher with Sightline Institute’s Democracy and Elections team, focusing on Alaska and its ranked choice voting and open primary system. Contact Robyn at robyn@sightline.org and find her latest research here.
