OPINION: We should repeal ranked choice voting

Alaska is voting on whether to repeal Ranked Choice Voting (RCV), a system narrowly adopted in 2020. Let’s examine the implications of this potential repeal.

RCV was introduced to Alaska with promises of reducing “dark” money in politics and allowing voters more choices in the primary.

In 2020, the campaign to establish RCV received significant funding from Outside organizations. Action Now Initiative contributed $2.9 million, while Unite America added $3.4 million. Who are these groups, and where are they based?

Action Now Initiative, founded in 2011 in Houston, has invested heavily in promoting RCV since 2016, contributing more than $6.5 million for campaigns in 2020 alone. The website says, “ANI supports electoral reforms to make our political systems more responsive and accountable to constituents.” Somehow it is hard to imagine that $2.9 million in out-of-state funding is meant to make the political system in Alaska more responsive and accountable to Alaskans.

Unite America is based in Denver and donated $3.4 million to Alaskans for Better Elections, an organization advocating for RCV. It is discouraging to see that such a large chunk of their funding comes from Outside groups. The top three funding sources for the current “No on 2″ website continue to include Action Now Initiative and Unite America.

The top contributor is Article IV, of Arlington, Virginia. They provide funds to local groups to change how elections are run in other states. Elections were given to the states to handle for a reason: each state’s residents and government knew best what their needs were.

Local opposition to RCV in 2020 garnered $579,426. The majority of contributions came from Alaska sources. The Republican State Leadership Committee and the Republican Party were among the few national organizations that supported this local grassroots effort. This discrepancy highlights the overwhelming influence of external funding on the RCV campaign.

Proponents of RCV also support primaries where all candidates from various parties appear on a single ballot, allowing voters to select their preferred candidate regardless of party affiliation.

While this gives voters more choices, there are significant risks. Without the usual vetting process from party primaries, candidates might not receive the scrutiny they need from their own parties, potentially resulting in less qualified candidates moving to the general election. It can blur party identities and confuse voters, making it difficult to understand each candidate’s true positions and qualifications.

Repealing RCV would not revert the state to completely closed primaries. Alaska would return to a system where each voter has one vote per election. Independents and undeclared voters would still be able to vote in the primary.

During this year’s primary, a convicted felon serving time in New York ran for Congress as a Democrat and is now advancing to the general election. Under RCV, voters could rank this candidate above legitimate choices, raising concerns about the integrity of the electoral process. The Democratic Party went to court to have him removed from the ballot. The Alaska Supreme Court refused to remove him. They determined it was legal for this candidate to run, so they couldn’t remove him from the ballot, even though he cannot legally serve in Congress.

Is this the outcome we really want? Wouldn’t it be better if people could not rank the felon above the legitimate candidate? A more straightforward voting method where each voter casts a single vote would mitigate such issues.

In Colorado, they reconsidered RCV. This November, let’s vote yes on Ballot Measure 2 to repeal it in Alaska and return to a simpler, more straightforward voting system.

Nancy Winniford, a 42-year resident of Alaska, is a former teacher who now writes children’s historical fiction.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.