By REP. JESSE SUMNER
I was born and raised in the Mat-Su Valley, am a proud supporter of President Donald Trump, and I believe the open primary and ranked choice voting system benefits Alaska conservatives—especially in Wasilla.
I’ve always believed in the values that make Alaska unique: independence, resilience, and fairness. Our state’s electoral system should reflect these values, ensuring that every Alaskan’s voice is heard and that our leaders represent the broadest possible support. Open primaries and ranked choice voting (RCV) are the best ways to achieve this, and as a Republican, I’ve seen firsthand how these systems benefit our party and our state.
I grew up in Wasilla, with my mom working as a geologist and my dad building homes. My upbringing taught me the value of hard work and self-reliance—values that have always resonated with me. After college, I returned home to contribute to our community, eventually running for the assembly, then the legislature. Serving in public office has been an eye-opener, showing me just how challenging it can be to get things done in government. But I’ve always believed that less regulation and smaller government are the best ways to let people live their lives freely and prosperously.
These beliefs are why I’m such a strong advocate for open primaries and ranked choice voting. In the 2022 House races, Republicans Julie Coulombe and Tom McKay won their seats thanks to RCV, which helped our party secure a majority in the House. This led to a historic moment for Wasilla, with Cathy Tilton becoming the first House Speaker from our community. For the first time in more than six years, Republicans have a majority in the House. Open primaries and RCV made it possible for us to come together and form a majority caucus.
The critics who claim RCV doesn’t work for conservatives are simply wrong. If we look back at past elections, it’s clear that RCV could have prevented some significant Democratic victories. Take the 1994 gubernatorial race, where Tony Knowles won by just 0.3% over Republican Jim Campbell. With RCV in place, the 38,000 voters who chose other candidates would have had their second and third choices counted, likely swinging the election in Campbell’s favor. Similarly, in the 2008 U.S. Senate race, Senator Ted Stevens lost by 1.3% to Mark Begich. Many of the 18,000 voters who supported third-party candidates would have likely ranked Stevens as their second choice, giving him the edge he needed to win.
Open primaries and RCV don’t just benefit individual candidates—they benefit our entire party and the principles we stand for. These systems ensure that conservative candidates can build broad coalitions of support, preventing vote-splitting that could allow a liberal candidate to win with less than 50% of the vote. This is especially important in a state like Alaska, where many residents, like me, value small government, limited regulation, and the freedom to live our lives without unnecessary government interference.
Some argue that Republicans should drop out after the primary if they get fewer votes, but that would be a mistake and lead to history repeating itself. We don’t want a repeat of 2022, when the U.S House seat went to a Democrat. In an RCV election, even if someone doesn’t rank you first, their vote can still count for you in later rounds. This is why it’s crucial for Republicans to stay in the race and continue to fight for every vote.
At the end of the day, open primaries and ranked choice voting are tools that allow conservatives to consistently control state government—because whether they’re affiliated with a party or not, most Alaskans lean conservative. If you believe in small government and personal freedom, the open primary and ranked choice voting system is essential to preserving Alaska’s unique spirit.
Jesse Sumner is a state House representative. He lives in Wasilla with his wife and children.
Well it didn’t work last time, did it? Sounds like Rino talk to me.
Julie Coloumbe and Tom McKay nearly lost because another Republican was still running in the general. If they had been eliminated in a primary first both candidates would have won by 5-10 points. RCV hurts us.
Beg to differ Rep. Sumner: RCV got us Mary Peltola and Lisa Murkowski —
Two horrible and Anti Alaskans as it gets Brother. You are way off base on RCV.
How many of your constituents want RCV? Better follow their wishes
Jim
They will follow the wishes of the people who bother to vote.
I’ve been saying for years the rot in Anchorage was infesting the Valley, and people said naw, it’s fine. We’re solid.
Evidence is right in front of you.
RCV violates the first principle of one person, one vote. You gave several examples of republicans winning due to RCV. How many democrats won by RCV?
The primary is the best way for party’s to select their candidate for the general election. When a candidate cannot or does not win the primary, most partisan voters do not want them to represent them in office. That’s why they lost.
Repeal RCV. I am voting against it in November.
Yes Bryan and I am voting against the voting mess.
Use the kiss method and make it simple.
RCV’s biggest failure was its original purpose, which was to elect Lisa Murkowski to the U.S. Senate. The consequences of that outcome will continue to weigh on Alaska for too long – if Alaska ever recovers from it. RCV places the constitutional rights of individuals in a blender by virtue of bipartisanship forced on the electorate. The Murkowski outcome proves the risks of RCV far outweigh the possibility of isolated successes. What is needed is not just the repeal of RCV, but also a Constitutional Convention to address the fact that the judicial branch of Alaska’s government is controlled not by the people of Alaska, but instead exclusively by attorneys and the judicial branch itself. Failure to address both RCV and Judicial Branch issues will continue to plague the freedom of Alaskans. Does the candidate support a Constitutional Convention for the stated purpose?
Sumner is a proponent of incumbent protection.
And if he owned a bill, it would be dead from diarrhea.
Thanks again to the PM radio host who pimped this so hard for Scott Kendal.
It sounds like Mike Porcaro’s terrible radio advertisements are running again. Alaska voters should NOT be fooled a second time. Ranked choice voting is WRONG for Alaska and Alaska voters.
I hope he is in hiding and has left the state.
RCV would do as Rep Sumner suggests but only if we had a closed primary first. Then a Libertarian or an AIP candidate’s votes would be redistributed preventing a Ted Stevens situation.
Ranked choice damages the party with the most candidates in the general election – many people will not rank.
That’s why Democrats don’t have more than one candidate.
RCV is a great idea, in theory. The problem is that the low information voter never learns the intricacies of the process. A voter doesn’t have to rank all the candidates on the ballot. Is Sumner going to take the time to explain that to people? RCV assumes a rational, strategic, thinking electorate, but that ship sailed a long time ago.
Why is Sumner pretending to be a conservative?
He’s not only liberal, but can’t do real math either.
Oh Jesse, you never fail to disappoint!
julie coloumbe and tom mckay almost lost because of rank choice voting not the other way around.
if rank choice voting was so good the. there would be more than in democrat in any of these races but there isn’t.
party primaries help weed out disingenuous politicians like
yourself.
The whole RCV thing was put in place to keep Lisa M. in office and paved the way for Mary P. to get in and do absolutely nothing for the state in terms of resource development. Both are obvious pawns that do Their Master’s bidding without regard for the Constituency they represent.
Hey Jesse, I might be a bit inclined to listen to your argument listed above, except were you not the promoter of House Bill 186? That bill was singularly the silliest piece of legislation I’ve ever read, (and back in the day I worked in the State Senate and filed and read many bills!) I wrote you a nice letter with an explanation as to why you were on the wrong track and never got a response from you.
Do you have a primary opponent? If so kindly tell me who He/She/ or It is so I can rush them a campaign donation.
Robert Schenker [email protected]
Perhaps I’ll get a response from you this time?
I do not think that RCV works the way most people think it works…..and if I’m wrong please correct me.
RCV only amplifies the voice of the least prevalent opinions, and your second/third/fourth choice only matters if your first choice is eliminated in the first round. In Alaska, I think it’s fair to say that the voting populace trends conservative overall, so RCV thereby amplifies the voices of non-conservative voters – as it was intended to do.
If RCV was structured so that EVERYONE’S second choice pick was factored into the math, then it would more accurately reflect the will of the voters, but it is not and does not do this.
I will vote for its repeal.
I think the author bumped his head
NO to RCV.
Only the candidates with a party’s endorsement should have that partisan affiliation shown on the ballot. Everyone else is unaffiliated.
The endorsement process is for the parties to manage, not the government.
Whether through elections or smoke filled rooms is for the party to decide.
Having a candidate self- identify with a party is meaningless.
Bull s—, Jesse. No more rank choice voting. It’s corrupt.