Alex Gimarc: The definition of insanity and ranked-choice voting repeal II

By
SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
53

By ALEX GIMARC

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” – Often misattributed to Albert Einstein. It was more accurately attributed to Rita Mae Brown in Sudden Death, 1983, and a Knoxville, TN newspaper article in 1981. Earlier versions can be traced back a century.  It is an increasingly popular phrase.  

Why should we care about this today? Well, Phil Izon and the 907/Honest guys are back at another bite of the apple, cranking up yet another repeal of Ranked Choice Voting. He made the announcement in an e-mail sent Nov 29.  It is a call for sponsors for signature gathering to float another ballot initiative. Last time around, they had 182 sponsors.  He thinks they can get 300 – 500 next time around. Signature gathering will be timed to make the 2026 ballot.  

Why is this an exercise in insanity? Because signature gathering for this issue is easy. Actually winning the campaign to pass the initiative is hard, especially an issue that is about as close to a 50 – 50% voter split statewide as you can get. 

RCV was originally passed in 2020, winning a 3,781-vote victory (50.55% of the total vote, 174,032).  Votes against were 49.45%, 170,251.  Final results this time were much closer, with repeal failing by 737 votes.

The money spent in passing and defending RCV is the real problem. When it was passed in 2020, its backers raised and spent over $6.8 million. Opponents responded with nearly $0.6 million. They were outspent over 10:1. This time around, defenders of RCV raised and spent a whopping $14.6 million.  Supporters of repeal were far behind at $0.5 million, being outspent 28:1.  The vast majority of money spent passing and defending RCV was and continues to be Outside money.

The pro-RCV side crushed the anti-RCV side with spending in two elections. Does Mr. Izon believe the results in 2026 would be any different? If so, why?  

The good news is that the anti-RCV has demonstrated that they can raise half a million dollars for a statewide campaign.  That money is wasted in fighting multi-million-dollar flood of pro-RCV outside money in any statewide campaign.  How could it be spent better?

One way would be to elect a Legislature and governor supportive of RCV repeal. For example, if that money were used to remove Republican legislators from office who simply can’t wait to cross the aisle and form “bipartisan” caucuses, we can actually form Republican led caucuses. 

In the House, this would be voting out ringleaders like Louise Stutes and Chuck Kopp. In the Senate, this would be Cathy Giessel, Gary Stevens, Bert Stedman and Kelly Merrick. 2026 is also a gubernatorial year, so we need a supportive Republican governor for RCV repeal.  

We’ve tried fighting RCV twice with the same results:  Close losses at the ballot box after getting outspent 10 – 30:1 in Outside money. What makes repeal crowd think a third time will be the charm? Nothing that I can see from here.  Perhaps I am missing something.  

If what you are doing isn’t working, it’s time to do something else.  

Alex Gimarc lives in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing and disabilities policies. His weekly column “Interesting Items” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He was a small business owner and Information Technology professional.

Lt. Gov. Dahlstrom approves recount of ballot measure on ranked-choice voting

53 COMMENTS

  1. While I appreciate the sentiment, I do want to know: what would you suggest to do different?

    • “what would you suggest to do different?”

      Alex covers that right up there^^^. Did you bother to read the article?

      • Merrick is on her third term, god knows how many Stutes has been in. The problem is with the Alaska GOP itself that must support the primary challenges and does nothing to censure the backstabbing done by those listed. I say do both. We could literally wait until death for the right legislators to be elected. Clean the voter rolls, stop accepting late mail ins and we never would have had this monstrosity.
        If we repeal RCV, perhaps the GOP could take the clue. If we didn’t have RCV we wouldn’t have Merrick, she would have lost in the primary.

      • He’s right in his suggestions, but he suggests no tactic to do it, likely because Republicans have failed to do it for so long. These “bipartisan caucuses” have been a hallmark of the Alaska Legislature for at least 45 years. And instead of winning a single initiative which steadily hovers at a near 50%/50%, while spending a fraction of what the opposition spends, you have to win multiple Legislature seats and pray that your winning candidate isn’t a surreptitious backstabber. Good luck with that.
        Heck, you’re bucks ahead running this initiative every cycle just to force your opponents to spend massive amounts of money defending their position.

        • That $14.6 million ended up funding most if not all of the democrat / indy down ballot races for legislature. Take a look at the APOC reports.

          If you want democrats and their campaign infrastructure well funded from now until doomsday, keep floating this initiative. If not, try another way. Cheers –

    • I talked with numerous people after the election. Many of them told me that they had voted NO on Prop 2 to get rid of RCV. The convoluted wording of the initiative forced people to vote YES, to mean NO.
      I personally think that this crazy wording sank Prop 2. Yes- I will again support Phil Izon financially. We need to try again, but with easy to read, straightforward wording of the initiative, this time. That will make all the difference.

      • Your beef is with the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. She writes the language that actually appears on the ballot. Those who put forward the ballot measure and collect the signatures have no control over that.

        The language on the ballot has been terrible twice now. If you would like to see things improve ask why convoluted language has ended up on the ballot twice now.

        In the end, voters will have to vote “YES” at the ballot box in order to change the law. “No” means leaving the status quo in place…but it sure would be nice if voters had a better notion of what those two options actually mean when they go to cast their vote.

  2. Doing it twice is insane? Naw. Doing it correctly this time is what needs to happen. The fact that there is so much money being spent is what’s insane. Wording on the ballot matters as well. Public testimony also demonstrated that more people wanted to be rid of RCV. It doesn’t do what it’s being sold as, I don’t care how much you spend on those lying ads.

    This time, I’ll be volunteering to help gather those signatures. I’m sick of the State of Alaska and its shoddy elections, too, and the judges who decide to make or break laws in that regard. I’ve seen enough.

    • Manda, I will also be joining in to collect signatures. You are correct about the wording on the ballot needing to be clear. I would also start repeating and listing all the states that voted NO on RCV in 2024 and other states whose legislatures have said NO to it. Lastly the elections have got to be improved as you said.

    • Third time is the charm ! Alec left that one out ! I’ve read in these same pages , outspent almost 150 to 1 . Dark money flowing in like a river of crude ! Slick ads to keep the less informed more confused !

  4. Truly, the definition of insanity in this case is believing our “elections” are honest and free. “Dark money” is only a small part of the problem….talk about dirty voter rolls, mail in (and email!) voting, machines, and multiple weeks to count ballots. Seriously, anyone who still believes any of this is legitimate lacks any legitimacy in my opinion.

    Re-posting my earlier comment regarding this:
    Meanwhile, Conservative, Inc. is giddily telling us about how successful ‘banking votes’, ‘too big to rig’, and other ridiculous ideas won Trump all kinds of new voters in 2024 over 2020….conveniently not mentioning that Harris has collected enough votes since election night to be within 1% of the popular vote – Trump at slightly less than that magical 50%…According to the voting “data”, all of the new voters for Trump only accounted for 2 million people more than 2020 when their own data is showing double digit growth across almost every demographic group. And even more troubling are all the down ballot races that are being handed to the left with no opposition from the GOP….sure, they voted for Trump but they didn’t want MAGA in the legislative branch or their state or local governments… Look in Alaska – we have an even weaker state legislature and local governments and RCV…..did the uni-party agree to let all this slide in exchange for Begich’s seat?

    Whoever is behind all of this is very clever….keep people thinking we are evenly divided with that magical 50% BS, that “we’ll get them next time” so keep contributing, and that “dark money” convinced the stupid people to vote against their best interests…..keeps the same people in power and the masses thinking they have some control over it….Meanwhile, the state is opening immigrant job centers, creating permanent homeless housing, and completely locking in socialism…..but we’ll get them next time so sign up now to get RCV repeal on the ballot in 2028!! We truly are a stupid people.

    • Aw the elections are crooked voice raises its head. The only thing lacking from your argument is evidence. Show me that there has been voter fraud in any modern election the exceeds 100 votes. I think you had have a hard time producing 10 cases. I’m all for cleaning up the voter rolls, unfortunately it sounds easy but is actually very difficult. People leave Alaska all the time, but don’t notify the division of elections hence their name stays on the voter rolls. They don’t necessarily vote even if their name is on the roll. Let’s over turn the Citizen’s United vs FEC ruling and make it very clear who is funding what political speech. Citizen’s United is a conservative group that has allowed unlimited dark money to come into politics. The Billionaires Boy’s club loves it as they are essentially allowed to buy politicians in secret. RCV is the best way to destroy the 2 party system in the USA. End the exemptions to open meetings acts during legislative caucus meetings as well.

      • Plenty of evidence.
        No serious investigations into that evidence.
        .
        Which is why you said “Show me that there has been voter fraud in any modern election the exceeds 100 votes.” Setting the bar so high that you can reject any evidence presented.
        .
        Want evidence? It is all over the place.
        But, want evidence that proves more than 100 ballots were illegally cast… well, that requires an investigation, prosecution, and conviction. Which is way more than evidence.

      • “……..Show me that there has been voter fraud in any modern election the exceeds 100 votes……..”
        ‘https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Illinois
        Of course, there’s always the general election of 1982 in Anchorage when somebody caused a power outage throughout the entire east side with a well placed rifle shot at the Muldoon plant just before evening during a snowstorm….

  5. I agree! We have to focus on who is going to be our next governor , increase GOP leadership positions and fight the Dems at their own game.

  6. There are endless adages that can be applied to every situation.

    “Persistence is to the character of man as carbon is to steel.”–Napoleon Hill

    It ain’t about how hard you’re hit; its about how hard you can get hit and keep movin’ forward.”–Rocky Balboa

    “Energy and persistence conquer all things.” Benjamin Franklin

    Also, we drain $25 from Marxists for every $1 we spend.

    • Actually you ensure that outside $$$ ends up funding all the down ballot races on the democrat side. Take a look at the APOC reports to see all the grants and donations made by the pro-RCV side to local campaign organizations on the democrat side. Cheers –

  7. Alex, You are wrong, not to try is insanity. Just because 50% of the people of Alaska were uninformed and 75% of Anchorage, we have to try. At some point I believe the people will stop believing all the trash that comes over the TV, mainly the news.

    • The voters weren’t uninformed. They were lied to. And Our Side had absolutely nothing to counter those lies. How do you plan to do it next time around? Cheers –

  8. For those who ask “What else can we do?”, please re-read the column on Article 3, Sec. 16. ‘https://mustreadalaska.com/bob-bird-the-unchecked-alaska-judiciary-says-obey-our-rules-even-though-we-dont-obey-your-rules/

    Tell me, what is easier … persuading an entire state to repeal RCV or ONE MAN (Dunleavy, or some future governor). Yes, we all know Dunleavy is unpredictably wussy. So, read that again: “unpredictable” and “wussy”. Why aren’t we turning our guns on HIM? He might cave in to pressure (wussy) and do the unexpected (unpredictable). But we need legislators to get on board with this. Even Bjorkman might, who publicly says he regrets endorsing RCV in 2020.

    I have emailed the governor and requested an audience. What about the rest of you?

    • Agree 100% Bob. Another ‘target’ is our Lt. Governor who apparently has political ambitions to go higher….election integrity is her damn job so make her famous for not getting behind pushing to repeal RCV through the state governor and/or legislature.

    • Say Yes Jess tells anyone he talks to exactly what they want to hear. He’s nothing but a lying bag of wind with many puppet strings attached. He actually told us on a zoom call into a district 7 meeting he couldn’t stand to be in the same room as Shower.

  9. It’s a bit fishy that the dark money RCVers are compelled to spent over $21M to get and keep RCV.

    1. That ballot measure was supposed to keep dark money out of our elections. lolol

    2. It was unconstitutional from the start and the crooked (or dumb) state Supreme Court went along with it.

    I think you missed the mark here, Alex.

    • RCV was specifically written to allow the flood of Outside $$$. This not a bug. It was a feature.

      Agree that it is and was unconstitutional from the start. Problem is that once the AK Supremes come down on the side of unconstitutionality, you’re kind of SOL unless you take it to federal court which nobody chose to do. We accepted the defeat.

      Want to get rid of this, you only have 2 choices: Ballot initiative, which failed twice, or legislatively which hasn’t been tried. Maybe it is time to try Door Number Two. Cheers –

  10. From a financial standpoint, getting outsiders to infuse our economy with millions of dollars of advertising is good for Alaska.

    • Quickster wrote: “From a financial standpoint, getting outsiders to infuse our economy with millions of dollars of advertising is good for Alaska.”

      Correction: From a democrat standpoint, getting outsiders to infuse our campaigns with millions of dollars of advertising is good for democrats.

      There, fixed it for you. Cheers –

  11. Gimarc, you are missing the point completely. If we vote on RCV again by 2026, it will be just “in time” to finally get rid of that stinking Murkowski.
    Wake up, dude!

  13. Alex,

    You forgot to include Bjorkman in your Senate turncoat list.

    While I appreciate the sentiment that we need to elect better representation, the exact same argument can be made there. What we need is for voters to be informed, better informed. That doesn’t mean just telling people the information since you can tell people anything, it involves getting people to want to be informed. Until that happens we will keep electing representatives who blatantly lie to the people they are supposed to be representing and serving. I’m not sure how exactly we force people to engage, it’s more of a personal accoutablity issue that we should all hold ourselves to and we should encourage others to as well.

  14. With a vote margin of around 700 and the structuring of the language in the ballot measure itself, I would bet money that many more than 700 people voted NO thinking that a NO vote meant repeal Ranked Choice Voting.
    That, coupled with the fact that RCV costs taxpayers more money, does not in fact get rid of dark money as it promised and forces a two week wait for results, yeah I’m pretty sure that RCV can be repealed, and even if it can’t be repealed in the next cycle, Alaskans seem to have figured out how to beat it’s original intent anyway. I also welcome causing the proponents of RCV to spend another $10-15Million.

  15. Luck and perseverance and optimism mixed with organization may get us past the corruptness that plagues our elections.
    We see what “too big to steal” can do
    Thank Lord for President Trumps three-peat.

  16. I keep asking I sent one person one vote the law?
    How can you vote for multiple people with one vote?
    Besides that you don’t control your vote the system does by putting it to the politician they want not your choice.
    In my book that’s illegal to have multiple votes and somebody else controls your vote.

  17. Genuinely low IQ take here. The left wasted $15,000,000 on RCV this year what else could they have spent that money on? Would be great if we could get them to blow on nonsense $15,000,000 every cycle. We got them to burn cash at a 100:1 ratio and you don’t see how that is a good thing?

  18. Try again. Outside pro-RCV sponsors should see by now that they are getting nothing for their investments. RCV did not tip the balance of any election. Alaskans know the game now, so most don’t rank. Money behind RCV should fall. Make the wording on the ballot simpler so people don’t get confused.

  19. Abolish ONLY RCV, and leave abolishment of party primaries alone. Had this been done in this most recent repeal effort, it would have succeeded. If an alternative voting method is needed to replace FPTP, find one acceptable to most voters, especially Republicans. Consider approval voting which is vastly different than RCV. Also, in the mean time, pass some version of an “Eric Hafner law” that requires candidates get authorization from parties to use the party name.

  20. With a weak-willed, feckless and impotent establishment GOP in Alaska, what you suggest won’t happen. Even if the panty-waist GOP had a 60% majority, those gutless wonders will caucus with the Democrats. Or outright pull the Merrick and Giessel head fake to nowhere. No, Alex, the question is, why the establishment GOP is giving up rather than helping lead the charge and fundraise to crush this during the next election. Then again, we know Lisa is all for RCV. Too many Rs have a stomach problem. It’s called NO GUTS. If you’re not going to be part of the solution, stand back, hide in the bushes and watch.

  21. We have to keep fighting. People like Kelly Merrick would have lost the Primary in Eagle River but RCV allowed her to pretend she was a Conservative Republican and get into office.

    Furthermore, the failures of RCV in other states is making the continue funding to prop it up in Alaska less valuable for that Dark Money being spent from the lower 48.

    I don’t want to be pessimistic but the recount also appears to just be for show. Counting already started and, last I heard, the Alaska GOP hired Attorney wasn’t even there. Sure they have until next Friday to finish the recount but why isn’t our person there? Even worse, all the recounted ballots are being counted by a Dominion machine.

    The recount will likely fail. The Alaska GOP has not put any real money into stopping RCV and they need to step it up.

    I support the notion to continue fighting and try to repeal again. Change up messaging and hopefully push this over. I am unwilling to lay down and accept a “bi-partisan” state legislator.

  22. The real problem here is that Alaska needs to ban ALL outside money from internal elections. The RCV promoters are habitual liars, so committed to their cause that they are willing to spend millions upon millions to deceitfully promote their cause.

  23. When I worked at the Muni (ANC) I ran into Mr. Gimarc , who also worked at the Muni.
    Now I realize he came there from the military (also government)
    So has Mr. Gimarc spent his whole life as a government servant?

    We should keep fighting this Alec
    Or do you think we should be the only chumps to have this shoved down our throats?

    Every State (except Southern Maine) has said NO to this.
    If your waiting for politicians to solve it your daft.
    “Fight ….. Fight …… Fight” – Donald J Trump

  24. Alex, maybe you’d like to think about this statement again?:
    “……..Actually winning the campaign to pass the initiative is hard, especially an issue that is about as close to a 50 – 50% voter split statewide as you can get………”
    Isn’t it obvious that winning a campaign teetering on a perfect 50%/50% would be easier than trying to win a campaign for 5% against 95%?

    • When the Other Side can bury you in $$$, completely drowning out anything you are trying to say, a 50 -50% split might be as far away as 95 – 5%.

      Remember the RCV campaigns were based on two Big Lies. In 2020, it was the ban on Outside $$$, which it was never intended to do. This year, it was based on the notion that Party Insiders were trying to take away your right to vote for whomever you wanted to vote for (a defense of the jungle primary). Next time around, it will be something else, and the repeal guys will only have about half a million in the bank to counter the lies.

      Any suggestions how to solve that little problem? Cheers –

Comments are closed.