Listicle: Will ranked-choice voting repeal petition have enough signatures to get on the fall ballot?


The petition to ditch Alaska’s ranked-choice voting was filed with the Division of Elections in January, and the Division has been busy verifying the signatures to make sure there are enough to put the question on the ballot.

The group that is trying to get the ranked-choice voting repealed, Alaskans for Honest Elections, filed over 42,000 signatures. It needed only 26,705 of those to be qualified as registered voters in Alaska, with a legitimate address, and other details.

But the group also needs 30 out of 40 House districts to be proportionally represented by signers of the petition. After over six weeks of waiting for the verification process, it still needs four more districts to qualify for the ballot.

From data acquired from the Division of Elections, it may be close. Democrat-dominated districts in Juneau and downtown Anchorage are still short qualified signatures, although the division is still counting. Districts 36 through 40 are coming up short.

For example, in District 40, the farthest north in Alaska, where Barrow and Kotzebue are located, there are 36 qualified signatures, but 190 would be required to add that district to the list. It appears unlikely that District 40 will have enough names to be one of the three remaining districts needed.

At the south end of the state — District 1 Ketchikan — the signature gatherers only needed 482 names, but 798 have qualified so far. Ketchikan is represented in this effort to repeal ranked-choice voting, and then some.

The total of qualified signatures so far — 33,650 — exceeds what is needed, so now it comes down to having 30 districts.

Of the signatures examined by the Division, 1,928 of were duplicates, 20 had no address provided, 57 had no date by their signature, 594 had no identification, 102 signed before they were registered, 495 were not registered voters, and there were a few other miscellaneous reasons why names were disqualified. So far, 3,580 signers have been disqualified.

Here’s where the signature verification process stands, with Alaskans for Honest Elections needing just three more House districts to qualify for the November ballot:


  1. Probably. The question then becomes what tricks will the establishment (both parties) use to disallow the signatures.

  2. Okay, so….we have a bazillion signatures, but they are not all verified YET – what is the use of writing this story? There’s nothing in here that shows anything that we don’t already know. We are still waiting to see if 3 more districts have the number of valid signers and the verification process has not been completed yet. I hope that the state is not taking Soros money to dump some of the valid signers and make it look like there were not enough signatures.

  3. This is all bull, RCV was shoved down our throats and now road blocks to repeal are showing up. Talk about bending rules to fit the agenda, no wonder people don’t want to vote, it’s all crocked

    • Our legislative representatives could do away with this in 5 minutes.
      Our MISrepresentatives hate us, this is proof.

  4. I live in Palmer, so I know there are enough signatures in my district already. But nobody ever asked for my signature! How can people (like in Anchorage) add their signature if they haven’t submitted it yet?

    • Barbara, from what I recall, there was someone standing next to the old Glenn Hwy out by the butte many days and collecting many signatures. There were some people that went to places around their neighborhoods and were asking their friends and neighbors. There were businesses that had books for people to sign, there were scheduled signing days at a variety of places including the Palmer Train Depot, the women’s Republican meeting days, and other places (I cannot recall). Oh, and at the sports complex in Wasilla. There were articles in the Alaska Watchman and Must Read Alaska about signing events.
      I get so tired of hearing people say that no one ever asked them to sign. Well, no one asked me either. When I heard about the petition, I went and sought out a place to sign AND THEN, I got a book so that I could go collect signatures around my neighborhood and at signing events. Anchorage had the same type of events also.
      As for the amount of signatures needed for each district, I hope that Alaskans for Honest Elections will be following up with the state if there are discrepancies! I know that group worked hard to get this all put together for submittal with the intention of getting this passed so that we could vote on it again.

    • This is the process to get it on the ballot so those that do vote in our elections get the chance to vote on it, granted that will likely be a small percentage of the population statewide since voter turnout is low.

  5. Would it be wonderful is they counted the votes this carefully in the actual election? Check to make sure the voter is real.

    • haha….. I was thinking the exact same thing! Would be nice if they put voter rolls and mail-in ballots under the same scrutiny.

      • Yet alone allow vote counting observers. Note the effort Mayor Bronson had to put forth to keep the Anchorage election counting in check. What ever happened with the Dominion guy inserting the USB stick in the machine during the last vote counting efforts? Still waiting for answers, maybe 5 years from now?

  6. Fly somebody with experience in signature gathering up to Utqiavik (and the other areas) to collect signatures. This is important!

  7. I think it should be illegal to give my vote to someone else besides who I voted for. One man – one vote. One vote for your candidate only.

  8. Is there some secret place for us to sign???
    Do I need to know the “secret handshake”? This petition is shady at best!

    • The petition signature drive has been over since January and we are waiting for the state to finish counting and verifying signatures. Any day now would be nice!

  9. Hmmm…
    Why are we having this discussion????

    By law the legislature can change or repeal after the initiative has been law for two years…

    Last time I checked there was a majority of “Republicans” filling the chairs in Juneau. This wouldn’t be something their illegal Binding Caucus could force a no vote on in the Senate. The house in theory has the numbers….so in times of deficit spending, why not save the cost of the election…..

    • That is what we have been asking also! The legislation has the power to get rid of it, but they won’t because cheating is the way that most of them even got into their seats!

  10. We want our voting back, we want our ONE vote to count, not our THREE votes to be somewhat counted depending on if we voted acceptably and according to the local ballot counter.
    Did you all know that the city of Anchorage, controlled by a commie assembly (9 of 12 seats are total commie) count our states ballots? All elections run thru anchorage machines.
    So, it IS all about WHO counts our votes, and here in Alaska, we will all be treated to being put in jail for asking questions of the counts. None of we the people (voting citizens) will be allowed to oversee elections, no republican or non demoncrat will be authorized by the commie assembly to participate in our elections, rules, road blocks and threats of jail…. Thats what we get here in Alaska.

    • This is the government Alaska has been voting for years.

      We have, unfortunately, the government we deserve.

  11. Repeal RCV
    Should have allowed: mail-in signatures on mailed-out requests; flexible deadlines; LOTS of out of state monies for advertisements on all local stations especially NPR stations; no high powered forensic sig/address checks. You know – the stuff that makes our elections so reliable.

  12. Our legislature needs to do the right thing and get rid of this travesty of election fraud. Sadly there are few elected legislators with much integrity so that won’t happen. The majority of them benefit from this so won’t do the ethical thing. They can’t keep their power and control if it is a simple one vote for one candidate. So disgusting.

  13. I published this comment in another on-line newspaper a month ago. I still have heard no one addressing this basic U.S. constitutional issue regarding RCV.

    ““Ranked Choice Voting”, “Eliminating Party Primaries” and “Financial Transparency” are three separate issues. The latter two were used to “sneak” in the former here in Alaska. I am surprised that no state or other organization has challenged RCV on U.S. Constitutional grounds based on the “one man, one vote” concepts implied on the basis that, as many have shown, it is so statistically complex you can end up with so many run-offs and/or counting schemes that a citizen’s vote is in effect, “negated”. At the very least a much smaller number of people out of all voters can elect a candidate compared to a normal election. That’s exactly how Mary Peltola got elected to replace Don Young.”

    One of many issues these days regarding our basic rights as U.S. Citizens.

  14. RCV is one person, one vote.

    This is what happens: you tally the votes, then if there is a candidate with >50% of the ballots, they win. If there is no candidate with a >50% majority, the losingest loser (with the fewest first place votes) is stricken from all the ballots.

    Then you throw out the previous tally, and tally again, counting the highest remaining choices on all the ballots that still have any choices that haven’t been eliminated. Rinse and repeat. One person one vote.

    It’s really not that complicated, and there is only one “counting scheme”. There’s no such thing as an election in which no voters are outvoted and their votes “negated”. RCV at least makes an effort to elect a candidate with majority support, rather than just a plurality (more than others but less than a majority).

    It is simply not true that a much smaller number of people out of all voters can elect a candidate with RCV; in fact it is the other way around. It requires >50% of the votes on ballots that have not been “exhausted” (used up by voting for losing losers). In a so-called “normal” election, the winner only has to have more votes than everyone else, a majority is not required.

    Peltola got elected because half the people who voted for Begich, who had the fewest first-place votes and was eliminated, either voted for Peltola as their second choice or left their second choice blank.

    • To a lot of people, having to make a second choice up front IS losing their vote in the long run. Also, unless you really follow the details of politics as a citizen, RCV IS complicated. Voting for one, and only one person on the ballot is understandable by all. Again, it would be interesting to see what our SCOTUS thinks! If democratic principles are to govern a free people, the election system must be trusted and understood by all.

      • But you don’t have to make a second choice. You can give up that opportunity if you want.
        It just means that if your first choice is eliminated, then your voice is no longer to be considered. At least you have a second chance to be heard if your first choice is not a popular one.

        “Normal” voting means you can’t lodge a protest vote to make a point for someone you are pretty sure can’t win, without throwing your vote away and possibly helping someone you don’t like. RCV lets you do that.

        I don’t believe putting up to 4 things in order of your preference is too much to ask for most people, but maybe I am giving people too much credit.

        • And that is the flaw in the RCV system, if our chosen candidate doesn’t make the 2nd ballot then we are sol, too bad so sad. That’s not how our election system is supposed to work, it’s supposed to be one person one vote, that’s ONE, not 3.

          • How is that worse? In a non-RCV election if your first choice doesn’t win right off, you are also SOL, but with no chance to be heard from with another candidate who might not be your first choice but is OK with you.

  15. keep in mind that the results are run through a “magic box” and there is no way to manually check the votes, as there would be with traditional ballots.

Comments are closed.