Alaska ballot measure · November 3, 2026
Alaska Ballot Measure No. 2, explained
Repeal ranked-choice voting, open primaries and 2020 campaign finance rules. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.
The official wording
Ballot Measure No. 2 — An Act Restoring Political Party Primaries, Ending Ranked-Choice General Elections, and Repealing Recent Campaign Finance Laws. 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?
This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.
What it actually means
In 2020 Alaska voters narrowly replaced party primaries with one open primary for all candidates, made the top four finishers advance, and adopted ranked-choice voting for the general election. The same 2020 measure added rules requiring big donors to disclose where their money originally came from. This initiative would undo all of that: back to party primaries, back to picking one candidate in November with the most votes winning, and out with the 2020 disclosure rules. A near-identical repeal of the voting system, without the campaign finance part, lost in 2024 by 737 votes out of about 321,000.
If you vote YES
- The top-four open primary would end. Each party would hold its own primary and could decide whether to open it to voters outside the party; a voter could take only one party's primary ballot, and the top vote-getter on each party ballot would be that party's nominee.
- Ranked-choice general elections would end. Voters would mark one candidate per race and the candidate with the most votes would win, whether or not that is a majority.
- Candidates for governor and lieutenant governor would run separately in party primaries and then together on the general election ticket, and party petitions and special runoff elections would return.
- The 2020 campaign finance rules would be repealed: the requirement that anyone contributing more than $2,000 from pooled money disclose the "true source" of the funds, the disclaimer identifying communications paid for by outside-funded entities, limits on donations to joint governor and lieutenant governor campaigns, and some fines for violations. The statutory meaning of a campaign expenditure would change.
- The Alaska Public Offices Commission estimates the changes would cost the state about $2.6 million to implement.
If you vote NO
- Alaska would keep the system voters adopted in 2020 and kept in 2024: one primary ballot listing every candidate regardless of party, with the four highest finishers advancing.
- General elections would continue to use ranked-choice voting, in which a candidate needs a majority; if nobody has one, last-place candidates are eliminated in rounds and their voters' next preferences are counted.
- The 2020 campaign finance rules would remain in force, including the "true source" disclosure requirement for pooled contributions over $2,000 and the disclaimer for entities that draw more than half their money from outside Alaska.
- Alaska would remain the only state using a top-four primary, and one of two states using ranked-choice voting for state elections.
The numbers that matter
- Cost to implement
- about $2.6 million
- Margin when a similar repeal failed in 2024
- 737 votes out of 320,985
Alaska Public Offices Commission estimate, reported by the Alaska Beacon
Alaska Division of Elections results for 2024 Ballot Measure 2, as reported by the Alaska Beacon and Ballotpedia
Why supporters say YES
Voters should mark a single choice: "Our campaign is about one person, one vote. That's been the bedrock of the American Republic for the last 250 years." The campaign also argues the 2020 disclosure rules did not keep out-of-state money out and are costly for small campaigns: "Smaller campaigns have to spend up to a third more of their money and their ad space on these disclaimers that do nothing to inform the public."
— Bethany Marcum, treasurer of the Repeal Now campaign, testifying at the Division of Elections hearing, July 27, 2026
"Ranked-choice voting was pitched as a reform to solve a problem that, frankly, didn't exist in Alaska. We were told it would reduce partisanship, promote consensus candidates, and make elections more fair. In reality, what we got was a system that confused voters, made outcomes less transparent, and created deep concerns about how votes are tabulated and who ultimately decides an election."
— Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R)
"We really feel like there should be one vote, one person in the United States. We're [one] of two states in the United States that has ranked choice voting. It's extremely confusing to people, most certainly people that are maybe older and don't understand it."
— Judy Eledge, chair of Repeal Now and a sponsor of the initiative
Why opponents say NO
The campaign finance repeal matters more than the voting system: "Ballot Measure 2 is a bit of a Trojan horse … repealing RCV, that is only a fraction of what the measure does. No longer will there be a ban on dark money. In fact, any outside billionaire will be able to give money to another organization, and launder their contributions to that organization. And finally, it lowers or actually removes fines for certain campaign finance misbehavior." On closed primaries: "In a state like Alaska, where two-thirds of all voters do not register with either party, the thought of taking publicly funded elections and allowing the political parties to choke off who can participate in them should be abhorrent."
— Scott Kendall, testifying for the No on 2 campaign (Protect Alaska's Elections) at the Division of Elections hearing, July 27, 2026
Slow results are a mail problem, not a counting problem: "The mail system in Alaska is what it is. We have to wait for ballots to be brought in from across the state before we can tabulate. Again, that has nothing to do with ranked choice voting, because … the actual tabulation process takes mere seconds."
— Scott Kendall, No on 2 campaign, at the same hearing
The current system pushes candidates toward the middle: "Now, when our candidates campaign, they have to appeal to a majority of voters, not just the hardcore wing of any political party. We have a Legislature where more members are willing to work together to do what is best for Alaskans."
— Bryan Schroder, former U.S. Attorney for Alaska, testifying against the measure at the same hearing
What’s genuinely uncertain
- The Division of Elections had not published the 2026 official ballot language PDF or the general election Ballot Measure Pamphlet when this was written, so the official statements for and against — which the state prints alongside the measure — are not yet available. The wording above is the certified ballot title and summary.
- Both campaigns are largely funded from outside Alaska and each criticises the other for it. Through July 2026 the Repeal Now campaign had raised about $1.1 million, most of it from the Wisconsin-based Aurora Action Network; the No on 2 campaign had raised about $5.75 million, including $4 million from Unite America PAC of Colorado and $1.5 million from Voters from the American Center.
- The 2024 repeal attempt failed by 737 votes out of 320,985 cast, the narrowest ballot measure result in Alaska's history, so how the state's voters now divide on this is genuinely unsettled.
The bottom line
Whether to return Alaska to party primaries and single-choice general elections and drop the 2020 donor-disclosure rules, or keep the open top-four primary, ranked-choice general elections and those disclosure rules; supporters say the current system confuses voters and the disclaimers burden small campaigns, opponents say the repeal mainly removes limits on undisclosed money and lets parties decide who votes in primaries.
One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.
Checking it against the official text
The Alaska Division of Elections publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.
Confirm this with the official source
Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at Alaska Division of Elections.