Alaska weeds out extremist candidates with new voting model

One goal of placing all candidates for a race on the same ballot, regardless of party, is to eliminate polarizing figures. When more than 50% of votes is needed, not just a simple majority, that means candidates need to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters.

By

Columnists

January 31, 2022 - 9:58 AM

A poll worker holds up an "I Voted" sticker on Sept. 14, 2021. (Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images/TNS)

Alaska is a place both physically and psychically removed from the rest of America, which folks there refer to as “Outside.”

Note the capital “O,” as it appears in newspapers, which reflects both standardization and a proud embrace of the state’s apartness.

Isolation aside, Alaska has changed its elections in way that may be a model for the rest of the country as the U.S. sinks ever lower into a slough of political nihilism and dysfunction.

Starting this year, candidates will run in a one-of-a-kind system that starts by placing all of them on the same ballot, regardless of party. Then the top four vote-getters advance to the general election, at which voters will rank them in order of preference.

The idea is to reward candidates who show broad appeal and to undermine the hard-liners on both sides, resulting — in theory — in lawmakers more willing to get stuff done and leave the noxious political antics to the noisemakers on cable news and talk radio and the rabble on social media.

Jason Grenn helped promote the ballot initiative after serving a term as an independent in Alaska’s House of Representatives.

He spoke from his home in Anchorage, days after the state’s Supreme Court upheld the new system, which voters narrowly approved in 2020. It will be used starting with the August primary for governor, U.S. Senate and other offices.

Grenn said his time in the Legislature “served as a front seat on political division and fighting” in Juneau, the state capital, and the chronic allergy many lawmakers had to bipartisanship. He recalled talking with colleagues who recognized the merits of a policy proposal but shrank from public support for fear their vote would stir up their party base and result in a primary challenge from either the left or right.

Eliminating that threat “really does allow someone to say, ‘I’m voting for this because I think this benefits all Alaskans,'” Grenn said, “instead of being punished for working with someone not in their party.”

Other states, including California, operate under a primary system that allows the top two vote-getters to advance to a runoff, regardless of affiliation.

What’s unique is Alaska’s top-four system, combined with ranked-choice voting. Four slots are preferable, Grenn said, to give independent and third-party contestants a better shot at advancing and to further motivate candidates to reach out to different kinds of voters.

“When candidates compete not just against one another but also to become the second choice of those voting first for an opponent, it creates incentives for collaboration and consensus you don’t find in a top-two system,” Grenn said.

In most elections in America, the candidate with the most votes wins office, even if he or she falls short of a majority. (This is not the place to get into a discussion of the electoral college.)

Ranked-choice voting is different. Under that system, a candidate who wins more than 50% support is elected outright. But if no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, a new round of tabulation begins.

The candidate with the poorest showing is eliminated and those votes are reallocated to supporters’ second pick. The process continues until someone receives a majority of votes.

Related