Alaska’s top-four primary and ranked-choice general election (2020 to present)

Alaska’s election system since 2022 combines a nonpartisan open primary, in which “the four candidates receiving the most votes advance to the general election,” with ranked-choice voting in the general election, both enacted by a voter initiative in 2020 together with new campaign disclosure rules. The Alaska Supreme Court upheld the system in Kohlhaas v. State (2022); the first statewide ranked-choice race, an August 16, 2022 special election for the U.S. House, was won by Mary Peltola 51.5% to 48.5% over Sarah Palin in the final round; and a 2024 repeal measure failed 160,230 to 160,973 after a recount. A new repeal measure appears on the November 3, 2026 ballot.

In 2020, Alaska voters changed how they pick their leaders. Instead of separate party primaries, all candidates now run in one primary, and the top four go on to the November election. In November, voters rank the candidates. The change was close: it passed only after weeks of counting, and a later vote to repeal it failed by fewer than 800 votes. People who like the system say it rewards candidates who appeal to more voters. People who dislike it say it is confusing and weakens political parties. Voters will decide again in November 2026.

For Maine’s ranked-choice system, which Alaska’s builds on, see Maine’s ranked-choice voting. For ranked ballots as a research topic, see collective priorities.

Defined terms

Alaska’s system combines several terms that are often confused.

• Top-four (nonpartisan open) primary: a single primary open to all voters and candidates, in which the four candidates with the most votes advance to the general election regardless of party.⁠¹
• Ranked-choice general election: a general election in which voters rank the finalists and ballots transfer from eliminated candidates until one has a majority of continuing ballots.⁠^1,2
• Party designation: under the initiative, a candidate may state a party affiliation on the ballot without that party’s nomination or endorsement; ballots and polling places carry a notice that the statement does not mean the party approves the candidate.⁠²
• “Dark money” disclosure: the 2020 campaign finance rules, including a requirement that contributions over $2,000 disclose their true source.⁠³
• Recount threshold: Alaska pays for a recount when the margin is under 0.5% of votes cast.⁠⁴

What happened

Alaska’s system has a dated legal and electoral history.

• November 3, 2020. Ballot Measure 2, described in press coverage as a package bringing “open primaries, ranked-choice voting and new financial disclosure laws,” gained enough votes to pass only after several weeks of counting by-mail ballots.⁠⁵
• December 1, 2020. The Division of Elections certified the 2020 results.⁠⁵
• December 2020. Lieutenant Governor Kevin Meyer ordered a hand audit of the Measure 2 vote after members of the public raised concerns about voting machines; a bipartisan team reviewed 361,400 ballots and found no changes to the certified result.⁠⁶
• July 29 and September 14, 2021. The superior court rejected a constitutional challenge.⁠¹
• January 19, 2022. The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed in an order, with a full opinion to follow.⁠¹ The opinion, Kohlhaas v. State, 518 P.3d 1095 (Alaska 2022), upheld the open primary and ranked-choice general elections.⁠²
• August 16, 2022. Alaska’s first statewide ranked-choice election, a special election for the U.S. House seat of the late Representative Don Young. Results came on August 31; Peltola won the final round 51.5% to 48.5% with 93% counted, becoming the first Alaska Native elected to Congress.⁠⁷
• November 2024. Ballot Measure 2 to repeal the system failed; after certification and a recount requested by the Alaska Republican Party, the final count was 160,973 against and 160,230 in favor, a margin of 743.⁠⁴
• April 2026. President Donald Trump urged Alaska voters to repeal ranked-choice voting, calling it “disastrous, and very fraudulent”.⁠⁸
• November 3, 2026. A new Ballot Measure 2 (24ESEG) on the general election ballot would repeal the open primary, ranked-choice general elections and the 2020 disclosure rules.⁠³

How it worked

Alaska’s system works in two stages plus a disclosure regime.

Primary. All candidates for an office appear on one primary ballot; voters of any affiliation may vote for any candidate; the top four advance.⁠^1,3 Parties may still endorse, but the state no longer runs a nomination contest for them. The Alaska Supreme Court held that “political parties do not have a right to a state–run candidate nomination process”.⁠²

General election. Voters rank the finalists. In the August 2022 special election, which used ranked-choice counting, no candidate topped 50% in the first round, so tabulation continued until Peltola won the final round.⁠⁷ Republican Nick Begich, who was eliminated, had told voters that “a vote for Sarah Palin is in reality a vote for Mary Peltola”.⁠⁷

Constitutional reasoning. According to an Alaska Law Review summary of Kohlhaas, the court rejected the argument that ranked-choice voting could deny victory to the candidate with the most votes, reasoning that an election is not complete until all votes are tallied; held that the burden on parties’ associational rights was limited and supported by important regulatory interests; and held that the added burden on voters was justified by the interest in letting them express more nuanced preferences.⁠²

Disclosure. The 2020 rules require the true source of contributions over $2,000 to be disclosed.⁠³ The 2026 repeal measure would also remove spending limits and disclosure rules for digital ads, out-of-state donations and undisclosed donations, according to the state ballot summary as reported by the Alaska Beacon; the Alaska Public Offices Commission estimates implementation would cost $2.6 million.⁠³

Evidence: measured results

Alaska’s system can be measured through the votes that created, tested and nearly repealed it.

Campaign money in the repeal fights. In 2024, Alaska Public Media reported, the campaign against repeal raised nearly $14 million, largely from outside Alaska, and outspent the repeal campaign by about 100 to one⁠⁹ For 2026, the Alaska Beacon reported that the repeal campaign had raised $1.1 million, including $846,000 from a Wisconsin super PAC, and the campaign against repeal $5.75 million, including $4 million from Unite America PAC.⁠³ Both sides in both cycles drew substantial out-of-state money.

Margins. The unofficial 2024 count showed a 664-vote margin, which grew to 737 at certification and 743 after the recount.⁠^4,9,3 The recount confirmed the certified outcome.⁠⁴

Failures and criticisms

Alaska’s system is criticized and defended across party lines, and each position is attributed here.

From opponents: confusion and one person, one vote. The 2026 repeal campaign argues the system is confusing and burdensome; its treasurer said, “Our campaign is about one person, one vote”.⁠³ Sarah Palin called ranked-choice voting a “mistake” for Alaska.⁠⁷ The Alaska Policy Forum, a critic of ranked-choice voting, argues that because exhausted ballots leave the count, winners often lack a majority of all ballots cast.⁠¹⁰ President Trump called it “disastrous, and very fraudulent”;⁠⁸ no source verified for this page documents fraud in Alaska’s ranked-choice elections, and the 2020 audit and 2024 recount both confirmed certified results.⁠^4,6

From opponents: parties and the 2022 result. Critics argue the system weakens parties’ control of nominations, a burden the court found limited but real.⁠² Critics also point to the 2022 special election, in which a Democrat won a seat that a Republican had held for decades in a state Trump carried by 10 points in 2020,⁠⁷ as evidence that the system can let a candidate win when voters of the larger party split. Supporters reply that voters who ranked a candidate chose that outcome.

From supporters: broader appeal. The campaign against repeal argues that ranked-choice voting gives voters more choices and encourages candidates to appeal to a broader range of voters.⁠³ Peltola said she hoped voters would “vote their heart and not feel pressured”.⁠¹¹ Juli Lucky of Alaska for Better Elections said, “Alaskans created and enacted this system, and Alaskans will decide whether we keep it”.⁠⁸

From supporters: the disclosure stakes. Scott Kendall, testifying for the campaign against the 2026 repeal, called the measure “a bit of a Trojan horse,” arguing the disclosure changes matter more than the voting changes.⁠³ Repeal supporters frame the same package as restoring the pre-2020 system.⁠³

On bundling. Because the 2020 initiative combined three reforms, voters could not accept one and reject another. The 2026 repeal measure is also a bundle.⁠³ Critics of bundling on both sides argue it obscures what voters actually support.

Competing interpretations

Observers read Alaska’s experience in at least three ways.

A moderating reform. On this reading, the top-four primary and ranked general elections reward candidates who can win second-choice support, and the narrow survival of the system shows durable public support.⁠^3,4

A partisan rule change in disguise. On this reading, the 2022 special election showed the system can defeat the majority party’s voters when they split, and heavy out-of-state funding shows outside interests driving Alaska’s rules.⁠^3,7,9

A question of trust in counting. On this reading, the central issue is confidence: a 2020 audit and a 2024 recount both confirmed results,⁠^4,6 yet high-profile claims of fraud persist.⁠⁸ Neither side’s preferred voting rule resolves that by itself.

What transferred and what did not

Alaska’s system borrowed from and departed from other states.

Borrowed. Ranked-choice general elections had been used statewide in Maine since 2018; see Maine’s ranked-choice voting.

Distinctive. Alaska combined ranked general elections with a top-four nonpartisan primary and campaign disclosure in a single initiative.⁠^1,5 Its constitution, as interpreted in Kohlhaas, allowed ranked-choice general elections for state offices,⁠² which Maine’s highest court has advised its constitution does not; see the Maine case.

Not established. Whether the system has changed candidate behavior, polarization or turnout was not established by sources verified for this page.

Application to this framework

Alaska’s system bears on several parts of My Vote Forward.

• Bundles hide preferences. A single yes or no on three reforms cannot show which parts voters support. The framework records priorities and opinions on separate items; see priorities and opinions.
• Narrow margins need transparent verification. The 2020 audit and 2024 recount⁠^4,6 illustrate the framework’s emphasis on audits and verification.
• Disclose who pays. The framework’s rule against paid influence and its funding transparency principles parallel the disclosure debate; see governance.
• Ranked input requires clear explanation. Claims of confusion⁠^3,10 are a reminder that any ranking interface must be tested with real users; see question design.
• Separate the rule from the result. Opinions about a voting rule often track how one’s side fared under it. The framework asks for rules set before participation; see participation over time.

Unresolved questions

• What will Alaska voters decide on November 3, 2026, and on what margin?
• Has the top-four primary changed which candidates run and how they campaign?
• How much of the debate is about ranked voting and how much about the disclosure rules bundled with it?
• What share of Alaska ballots are exhausted in ranked-choice rounds, and do exhaustion rates differ by region or language?
• Can high-profile fraud claims be addressed by audits and recounts alone, or do they require broader changes in how results are explained?