Suzanne Downing: Alaska is voting itself blue

By SUZANNE DOWNING

Aug. 22, 2026 – Alaska has long thought of itself as a red state. But election by election and ballot measure by ballot measure, Alaskans are quietly voting themselves blue.

Take a look at primary results: The two Democrat (actual socialists) running for governor received nearly 42% of the vote, combined. That’s possibly a historic high for Democrats running for governor in Alaska — at least in this century.

The latest example is Ballot Measure 1, approved overwhelmingly in Tuesday’s primary election. It was sold as a reasonable campaign-finance reform designed to control big money in politics.

It sounded nice. It sounded fair. It was marketed as almost impossible to oppose. And hardly any opposition was raised to it before the primary.

That is how these measures work.

Most voters did not read the statutory language or study the contribution limits. They didn’t compare what individuals may give with what unions and political committees may contribute. They read the short summary on the ballot and voted for the idea that sounded most wholesome.

Who could oppose “restoring campaign contribution limits”?

But Ballot Measure 1 does not simply restrain wealthy donors. It reduces the political power of individual Alaskans while giving organized political groups,  including union-backed political committees, more financial muscle.

Under the measure, an individual may contribute no more than $2,000 to a candidate during an entire election cycle. A political group or union may give that candidate $4,000. In the governor’s race, an individual may contribute $4,000 to the joint ticket, while a group or union may contribute $8,000.

In other words, the individual Alaskan gets one limit. The organized political operation gets twice as much.

Rather than leveling the playing field, Ballot Measure 1 is tilting it toward organizations that already have professional staff, lawyers, lobbyists, member dues, and sophisticated political machinery.

The initiative also leaves independent-expenditure groups free to collect unlimited donations. The unions, national activist organizations and dark-money networks will still be able to move enormous sums through outside groups. It is the individual donor supporting a candidate directly who will be restrained.

Ballot Measure 1 may not survive constitutional scrutiny. Before the election, attorney Kevin Clarkson explained in The Alaska Story why the measure is likely unconstitutional.

The US Supreme Court has said government may limit contributions to prevent corruption or the appearance of corruption. But government cannot restrict political speech merely to equalize influence or “level the playing field.”

Yet the measure’s own findings say contribution limits are needed because political power should not be allocated according to wealth and because limits will “secure equal rights for Alaskans.” Those may be effective political slogans, but Clarkson argues they are not constitutionally legitimate reasons to restrict contributions.

The numbers present another problem. The $2,000 individual limit applies to the entire election cycle, covering both the primary and general election. That works out to an average of $1,000 per election — far below the inflation-adjusted value of contribution limits previously upheld by the Supreme Court.

The measure adjusts its limits for inflation only once every 10 years, beginning in 2031. By then, inflation will have substantially eroded the value of the contribution.

Someone — an individual, candidate or organization with standing — should challenge this measure in court. Alaskans should not have their political speech restricted simply because a cleverly written ballot summary made the restriction sound virtuous.

But this is not the first time Alaska voters have approved an election measure without fully considering where it would lead.

In 2016, voters approved automatic voter registration through the Permanent Fund dividend application. The measure automatically registers eligible applicants unless they opt out.

It sounded convenient. Apply for the dividend and become registered to vote at the same time. But applying for a PFD does not mean a person will ultimately qualify for one. The application is the beginning of an eligibility determination, not the conclusion. Using that application to trigger voter registration creates another opportunity for ineligible people — including possible noncitizens — to enter the voter-registration system and forces the state to clean up the rolls afterward.

Voting is a right of citizens. Registration should be a deliberate act by an eligible voter, not an automatic side effect of applying for a government payment.

Then came Ballot Measure 2 in 2020, which gave Alaska the open top-four primary and ranked-choice voting.

That measure was designed to protect politicians like Lisa Murkowski from Republican primary voters. Under the old system, Murkowski would have had to win the Republican nomination by persuading Republicans to support her. Under the new system, she could bypass the party’s voters and assemble a coalition of Democrats, independents and enough Republicans to remain in office.

Ranked-choice voting did not merely change how ballots are counted. It weakened political parties and stripped them of their ability to choose their nominees.

Now Democrats can register as Republicans shortly before filing and run under the Republican label without having any meaningful connection to the party or its platform.

The result is Democrats in sheep’s clothing — candidates using the Republican brand to confuse voters or siphon votes from actual Republicans.

This year, Alaska got “Decoy Dan,” a candidate who registered as a Republican shortly before entering the U.S. Senate race and who shares nearly the same name as Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan. He is advancing to the general election only because the top-four primary made it possible.

Under a traditional Republican primary, Republican voters would decide who represents their party. Under Alaska’s system, anyone may appropriate the party label, and every voter helps choose who advances.

Mail-in voting pushes Alaska farther down the same path. Democrats have invested heavily in mail-ballot programs because their political organizations are built to identify voters, chase ballots and make sure those ballots are returned. Republicans are generally more inclined to vote in person, where identification is presented and ballots remain inside a controlled election system.

Anchorage moved to vote-by-mail municipal elections, and the city’s politics have shifted sharply to the left. Correlation is not proof of causation, but Republicans would be foolish to ignore which party has benefited most from the change.

Mail voting is also becoming more embedded in state elections through absentee voting and expanded reliance on ballots moving through the postal system. Every step away from Election Day voting at a neighborhood precinct makes ballot custody longer, less visible and more dependent on government systems that the public cannot directly observe.

Each of these changes was marketed as convenient, fair or modern.

Automatic registration would increase participation. Ranked-choice voting would give voters more choice. Mail voting would make elections easier. Campaign-finance limits would keep big money out of politics.

But the cumulative effect has been to weaken parties, empower organized political interests, embolden Outside organizations, reduce the role of individual citizens ,and create an election structure increasingly favorable to Democrats.

Alaska is not turning blue because most Alaskans suddenly embraced the Democratic Party’s agenda. Alaska is turning blue because voters keep approving structural changes designed by the political left.

In November, Alaskans will have an opportunity to begin reversing the damage. Ballot Measure 2 would repeal the open top-four primary and ranked-choice voting and restore party primaries and traditional general elections.

Alaskans should vote yes.

This time, they should read beyond the slogans and think through what their vote will actually do.

Suzanne Downing if founder and editor of The Alaska Story, and is a longtime Alaskan.