> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://ivn.us/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Alaska Ballot Measure 2 Could Kill Open Primaries, Ranked Choice Voting, and Dark Money Rules in One Vote - URL: https://ivn.us/alaska-ballot-measure-2-could-kill-open-primaries-ranked-choice-voting-and-dark-money-rules-in-one-vote/ - Published: 2026-10-12T17:26:26.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-12T17:42:44.000Z - Description: Alaska voters will decide whether to repeal the state's 2020 election reforms, including open primaries, ranked choice voting, and campaign finance disclosure rules that expose dark money sources. - Author: Shawn Griffiths - Tags: Open Primaries, Ranked Choice Voting, Campaign Finance, Alaska, #Top-Story **ANCHORAGE, Alaska** — Alaska voters once again could fundamentally change the way elections work in their state, including who gets to participate in primary elections, and how much voters know about the money influencing their elections. Except, [unlike Question 3 in Massachusetts](https://ivn.us/massachusetts-could-end-party-primaries-heres-what-question-3-would-actually-do/), the vote is on whether to ditch reform, not put it in place. Ballot Measure 2 would repeal a nonpartisan election reform package approved by voters in 2020, replacing the state's nonpartisan Top Four primary and ranked choice general election system with partisan primaries and single-choice general elections. But there is a third component that is getting less attention: The measure would also roll back campaign finance disclosure requirements designed to expose the original sources of political spending, including money from outside Alaska. In other words, this is not simply a referendum on ranked choice voting as Yes on 2 ads have suggested. For supporters, Measure 2 is an opportunity to return to a party-nominated and controlled system, where taxpayer-funded primaries select party nominees and party leaders decide who gets to participate in these elections. It is also a chance for them to eliminate what they argue are unnecessarily complicated voting rules under ranked choice voting. For opponents, it threatens voter choice, the guaranteed right of independent voters (who make up roughly 60% of the electorate) to participate in public primaries, and financial transparency. This is the second time reform repeal has appeared on the Alaska ballot in two years. Voters rejected a similar attempt to repeal the state's open primaries and ranked choice voting by just 743 votes in 2024. The only difference this year is that the repeal campaign added new campaign finance regulations to the chopping block as well. ## **What Does the Ballot Say?** The initiative's official title is: “An Act Restoring Political Party Primaries, Ending Ranked-Choice General Elections, and Repealing Recent Campaign Finance Laws.” The ballot language reads: *“This act would get rid of open primary elections, where all candidates appear on one ballot. It would also get rid of ranked-choice general elections. It would bring back political party primaries and single-choice general elections. It would also repeal certain campaign finance rules that were added by a 2020 ballot measure.* *“Elections would occur as they did before open primaries and ranked choice voting. In the primary election, voters would choose a party’s ballot, unless prohibited by the party’s bylaws. They would only vote for candidates on that ballot. The winning candidate from each primary would be the party’s nominee. In the general election, voters would vote for only one candidate in each race. The candidate with the most votes would win. Party petitions, special runoff elections, and other processes would return. Candidates for governor and lieutenant governor would run separately in political party primaries and then together in the general election.* *“This act would also repeal campaign finance rules that were passed in 2020\. It would remove the limits on donations to joint campaigns for governor and lieutenant governor. It would remove limits and disclosure rules under current law, including for digital ads, out-of-state donations, undisclosed donations, and the true source of donations. It would change the meaning of a campaign expenditure and remove some fines.* *“Should this initiative become law?”* Put simply, a “Yes” vote would repeal the current Top Four primary, ranked choice voting, and specified campaign finance requirements. A “No” vote would maintain the current election system and disclosure requirements. ## **How Alaska Elections Work Now** Alaska's current nonpartisan election system was approved by voters in 2020 and was first implemented in 2022. The reform package includes a nonpartisan Top Four open primary system, in which all voters and candidates participate on a single ballot, regardless of party. Every voter can choose any candidate they want in any race. It also switched the voting method used in the general election to ranked choice voting, which gives voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate wins a majority, the last place candidate is eliminated and their voters’ next choices are applied to the results. The elimination process continues until a single candidate has a majority of votes. Ranking candidates is not mandatory. Voters can select just one candidate if they prefer. The 2020 package also established disclosure requirements intended to help voters identify the actual sources of money behind political advertising and independent expenditures. These include “true source” requirements for contributions funneled through an intermediary group. For example, Elon Musk gave the Wisconsin-based Aurora Action Network $1.5 million to support the Yes on 2 campaign. Over a million of that went to the repeal effort. The reason Musk’s involvement became public is because of these disclosure rules. [Alaska’s Ranked Choice Repeal Has a Dark-Money Clause Voters Can’t IgnoreAlaska’s effort to repeal ranked choice voting would also roll back campaign finance transparency rules, removing disclosure requirements for dark money and out-of-state donations that voters approved in 2020.![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/dc/be/dcbe1ac4-146f-43be-92a6-ea84728d86a6/content/images/icon/ivn-square-logo-5f83a004-09cd-4b2e-b0b0-c53c455d98df.png)Independent Voter NewsShawn Griffiths![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/dc/be/dcbe1ac4-146f-43be-92a6-ea84728d86a6/content/images/thumbnail/image-8c4629b3-d0ef-4567-8109-b4a066a069cd-da08bdd0-4212-4749-960f-04d053572d04.jpg)](https://ivn.us/alaskas-ranked-choice-repeal-has-a-dark-money-clause-voters-cant-ignore/) Without them, voters could know about the PAC, but not the people giving to it. ## **What Would Actually Change Under Measure 2?** Ballot Measure 2 would undo the central components of the 2020 package. | **Current system** | **Under Measure 2** | | -------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | | One primary ballot featuring all candidates | Separate partisan primary ballots | | All voters can select any primary candidate | Parties determine eligibility to participate in their primaries | | Top four candidates advance | Party nominees advance under old partisan rules | | Ranked choice general elections | Single-choice, plurality-winner elections | | Primary voters do not formally nominate party candidates | Party primary voters select nominees | | Enhanced true-source political spending disclosures | Repeal of specified 2020 disclosure provisions | The measure would also bring back provisions governing party petitions, special runoff elections, and associated election procedures. Candidates for governor and lieutenant governor would again compete separately in partisan primaries before running as a joint ticket in the general election. Notably, the campaign finance changes extend beyond simply repealing one reporting requirement. They would remove limits on contributions to joint gubernatorial campaigns established by the 2020 reform package, amend the definition of campaign expenditures, eliminate certain disclosure provisions, and remove some financial penalties. ## **What Supporters of Measure 2 Argue** The campaign behind Ballot Measure 2 is called Repeal Now, which has primarily focused its messaging on ranked choice voting. Supporters argue that ranked choice voting makes elections more complicated than necessary and point out that ballots can become exhausted if voters don’t rank every candidate. [The Ranked Choice Voting “Confusion Myth”Critics say ranked choice voting confuses voters, but real-world election data suggests most voters understand the system — and that ballot errors remain rare.![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/dc/be/dcbe1ac4-146f-43be-92a6-ea84728d86a6/content/images/icon/ivn-square-logo-7e40cbde-a9fd-449f-8131-7a95db6ca78b.png)Independent Voter NewsPaul Haughey![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/dc/be/dcbe1ac4-146f-43be-92a6-ea84728d86a6/content/images/thumbnail/ranked-choice-voting-confusion-68e50fbb-43b4-43d9-9251-db4eba4348d4.jpg)](https://ivn.us/the-ranked-choice-voting-confusion-myth/) An exhausted ballot occurs when it no longer has a ranking for any candidate remaining in the count. This concern is often brought up when discussing large candidate fields. According to state election data, approximately 4.2% of ballots were inactive in Alaska's 2024 US House election by the final round of ranked-choice tabulation, according to state election data. However, that figure includes ballots with overvotes and other issues, not just voters who declined to rank additional candidates. Since Alaska law allows voters to rank as few candidates as they wish, it is impossible to attribute every exhausted ballot to voter confusion. In Alaska, the most voters will see on the general election ballot is 4 per contest. At [a July public hearing](https://vimeo.com/1213321836?ref=ivn.us), Repeal Now Treasurer Bethany Marcum explained the campaign's position: “Our campaign is about one person, one vote.” The Yes campaign also argues that partisan primaries provide a clearer process for voters to select party nominees and allow political parties to maintain control over their own nominations. Under Alaska’s voter-nominated system, the purpose is not to select party nominees, but to narrow the field of candidates chosen by the broader electorate. It is worth noting that Alaska law does not prohibit political parties from endorsing candidates in the primaries. They are free to back whomever they want. The decision on who advances is left up to voters—not the parties. On campaign finance, Marcum argued that the 2020 disclosure requirements have not eliminated dark money and imposed burdens on smaller campaigns. “In our opinion, the money overwhelms the disclaimer,” she said during the July hearing. But this is a subject that the campaign is mostly avoiding, sticking instead to its messaging on ranked choice voting. ## **The Case Against Measure 2: Voter Choice and Transparency** Opposition to Ballot Measure 2 is led by No on 2 – Protect Alaska's Elections. The coalition includes election reform advocates, former officials, and organizations such as the First Alaskans Institute, [whose board announced its opposition in August](https://www.firstalaskans.org/first%5Falaskans%5Finstitute%5Fboard%5Fopposes%5Fballot%5Fmeasure%5F2?ref=ivn.us). FAI is an Alaska Native nonprofit. “Self-determination begins with having a vote by ensuring every voter can support the candidates they believe in and by providing transparency about the sources of election spending,” said FAI President and CEO Roy Apagruk Agloinga. > “These are important protections that strengthen trust in our democracy.” Opponents argue that the current primary system allows candidates to compete for support from the entire electorate rather than a smaller group of partisan primary voters. Further, since all voters are guaranteed the right to vote in taxpayer-funded primaries, the independent majority does not need permission from a party to participate. A “Yes” on 2 would mean returning to a system in which two private political entities have the most control over who is on the ballot and who gets to vote. Attorney Scott Kendall, who helped advance the original reforms, has also noted that the repeal of financial disclosure provisions cannot be overlooked. At the July hearing, he argued that these new rules were just as important as the primary and voting changes made in 2020. “Ballot Measure 2 is a bit of a Trojan horse,” Kendall said, arguing that the initiative would weaken protections against undisclosed political spending. Opponents also dispute the claim that ranked choice voting is primarily responsible for delays in determining election winners. Alaska's geography and reliance on absentee and rural mail ballots often extend the reporting process, regardless of the voting method used. ## **Controversial ‘Yes on 2’ Ad Claims It Will Return to the Days of Open Primaries** As[ ](https://ivn.us/the-most-dishonest-campaign-ad-in-2026/)[IVN reported in September](https://ivn.us/the-most-dishonest-campaign-ad-in-2026/), a Yes on 2 audio ad suggested that approving the initiative would bring back open primaries and reject dark money. The problem is that Alaska already has a nonpartisan open primary system that allows every voter to select any candidate. The system Measure 2 would bring back is different. It wouldn’t guarantee open primaries to all voters, but would let parties decide if independents can vote. Further, under Alaska’s previous partisan primary rules, when independent voters were allowed to participate, their choices were limited to the candidates of a single party. No on 2 Campaign Manager Julia Anastos accused the Yes campaign of misleading voters about the initiative's effects. The No campaign sent cease-and-desist letters to radio stations across Alaska demanding they refuse or stop airing the ad. ## **A Vote on Who Controls Alaska's Elections** There is a lingering question over how voters feel about this second attempt to repeal the 2020 election reforms since no polling has been conducted. The only baseline available is the 2024 vote, in which voters rejected repeal by less than a percentage point. But the 2026 electorate could look different from two years ago. Turnout likely won’t be the same. Voter incentives and motivations have also changed. In 2020, the reform package was approved by a similarly narrow margin. Different turnout. Different electorate. If the last 6 years have indicated anything, it is that voters haven’t budged much on the issue. It’s possible the results this year will be razor-thin as well because the questions before Alaskans haven’t changed: - Should primary elections be structured around political parties or around all voters and candidates? - Should general elections allow voters to rank candidates, or require each voter to select only one? - And should Alaska retain the additional disclosure rules that voters approved in 2020? What is certain is that Measure 2 would change more than the method used to count ballots. There is more at stake than ranked choice voting. It would restructure the candidate nomination process, change the role political parties play in taxpayer-funded primaries, and remove certain political spending disclosure requirements. The fundamental question voters really need to ask is, Who should have the most control in elections… the parties or voters? This is what is on the November 3 ballot.