Terrence Shanigan: Alaska’s election disenfranchisement scheme

6

By TERRENCE SHANIGAN

This is the third in a three-part series on Alaska’s election integrity.

In recent weeks, Alaskans have called for greater transparency and accountability in our election system, expressing concerns through court challenges, social media discussions, and peaceful protests rejecting a system designed to exclude voters. Three areas where Alaska’s election system faces risks.

First, when votes are received and counted, and when a decision is made to exclude a ballot. Second, how is the ballot chain of custody and security ensured during mail-in voting, and how is this process documented? Third, what happens to a ballot when there are technical errors; what is ballot curing? 

As the Alaska Division of Elections prepares to certify the 2024 results, frustration is growing over a troubling pattern: early vote counts often favor Republicans, only for a surge of mail-in ballots in the days after the election to shift results toward Democrats.

Alaska’s election model prioritizes ballot exclusion over inclusion, lacking reliable tools to verify eligible voters or identify improperly cast votes, effectively seeking to discard ballots. Instead of focusing on fairness, the system defaults to exclusion, favoring convenience over accountability.

Many voters are also registered in the wrong district due to boundary changes, risking disqualification in legislative races. Despite awareness of these issues, the Division of Elections has failed to notify voters or implement solutions. This persistent neglect leaves thousands of ballots, especially in rural Alaska, at risk of rejection, underscoring the urgent need for reforms to restore trust and voter inclusion.

Alaska lacks a ballot curing process, rejecting many mail-in ballots without notifying voters. Courts have ruled that curing is essential to voter rights, allowing voters to fix minor technical errors like missing or mismatched signatures. Other states notify voters of such issues, ensuring ballots are counted, as upheld in cases like Democratic Executive Committee of Florida v. Detzner (2018) and La Follette v. Padilla (2020). Alaska, however, disqualifies many ballots without notice, eroding public trust.

Adding to this, Alaska’s courts, with little resistance from the executive branch, have blocked key security measures, such as signature requirements. In 2020, despite legislative approval to keep signature verification during COVID-19, courts ruled it unnecessary for that cycle. This undermines election integrity. Allowing ballots from likely ineligible voters erodes confidence, but rejecting valid ballots from eligible voters is a greater injustice. Urgent reforms like hard voter registration deadlines and pre-printed eligibility rolls are needed to restore transparency and trust.

A critical issue is Alaska Statute §15.20.081(e), allowing absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within 10 days. The October 2024 Republican National Committee v. Wetzel decision deemed Mississippi’s similar practice unconstitutional, requiring ballots to be received by Election Day. Alaska’s law likely violates federal standards, meaning late-arriving ballots should not be counted. This process lacks proper controls, security, and transparency, opening our elections to fraud.

Before certifying the election, the division should audit all mail-in ballots received after Election Day to verify they are from eligible voters. The executive branch must propose aligning Alaska’s law with federal standards by requiring ballots to be received by Election Day, not just postmarked. Senator Mike Shower (R-Wasilla) has championed this reform since 2019. Concerned citizens should demand accountability from the Division of Elections, the state attorney general, and the lieutenant governor to ensure compliance with federal law and protect election integrity.

Alaska lacks a secure chain of custody for mail-in ballots. While you can track a pizza or FedEx package at every stage, Alaska’s vote-by-mail process suffers from inflated voter rolls, lax procedures, and poor tracking protocols. Anchorage’s ballot tracking system records only when a ballot is sent and received, offering no visibility into its journey. This lack of transparency creates the illusion of accountability while leaving custody and handling a mystery. Weak safeguards and loopholes further expose the system to risks, including illegal ballot harvesting.

By contrast, many states, like California, offer robust ballot tracking systems. California’s “Where’s My Ballot?” provides real-time updates via text, email, or voice call, allowing voters to monitor their ballot every step and receive alerts for issues. Alaska must adopt similar systems to ensure transparency, security, and voter confidence in its election process. The current system fails to meet these essential standards.

Since 2019, I have advocated implementing similar technology in Alaska, but the Division of Elections and executive branch officials have rejected these proposals. Their refusal undermines voter confidence and the integrity of Alaska’s elections. It’s time for Alaska to prioritize ballot security and transparency.

Alaska’s election system needs urgent reform to prevent disenfranchisement, particularly among rural residents, Alaska Native communities, the elderly, and deployed military personnel. While in-person voting achieves a 99.9 percent acceptance rate, mail-in ballots face rejection rates as high as 12.5 percent, as reported by Alaska Public Media in June 2022, often without voters knowing why their votes were discarded.

Until the system is fixed, in-person voting remains the most reliable option. Mail-in voters, especially in rural areas, face legitimate concerns about their ballots being rejected. As an Alaska Native, I worry about the increased risks for my family in remote communities. The executive branch’s inaction leaves the system vulnerable to errors, misuse, and corruption. Accountability must prevail.

Alaska’s leaders must fulfill their constitutional duty to protect voting rights, ensure integrity, and restore trust so every citizen knows their vote counts.

Terrence Shanigan is a lifelong Alaskan of Sugpiaq descent from Bristol Bay. He is also the co-founder of Mission Critical, is a combat veteran, an honored husband and a dedicated father.

6 COMMENTS

  1. Well stated, Terrance. This waiting up to (and beyond!) ten days for a mail-in ballot to arrive is ridiculous. We know we don’t get overnight with Amazon OUT of state, but it never takes even five days! We can get a mail-in ballot to its destination IN state faster.
    It sure appears we accept mail-in ballots until “we” get the results “we” are looking for.

  2. Thank you for this article.
    As an Alaska Native I share your concerns.
    Governor has the authority and responsibility. Article III Section 16

  3. As of this past General Election (2024), I have cast my last ballot in Alaska. From here on out, my primary concern is going to be keeping my name off any and all voter registration rolls, in an effort to make sure “I” never vote for a communist, excuse me Democrat, or Communist concern (i.e.: any municipal bond proposal or Rank Choice Voting).

    Since observing the Division of Elections ignoring the law in 2010 to ensure Lisa was re-elected by counting illegal votes, to the “emergency” in 2014 that discarded tens of thousands of Democrat Primary votes to bring us the Walker/Mallot ticket and the travesties that resulted from that, to the fraud known as Mail-Only elections in Anchorage, to the courts simply ignoring constitutional requirements in 2020 (which we are told brought us the fraud known as Rank Choice Voting), to 2022 and returning that lying fraudster Cathy Giessel to the State Senate, to this most recent cycle where the establishment simply counted “votes” until they got the result they wanted on Ballot Measure 2 (RCV), I now know that my vote simply is not of concern to the establishment in Alaska.

    The best thing I can do from now on is to ensure my name never votes in another Alaska election.

    And if you think I’m off my rocker, remember, we were told 4 years ago that a babbling old man incapable of delivering a cogent thought received 10 Million more votes than Cacklely McCackles just did (and she was supposedly running against the second coming of Hitler).

    • I don’t think that the state even follows its own rules about removing voters from the voter rolls. I have heard people say that, even though they requested being removed multiple times, they were still on the list for more than a year. From their website at ‘https://www.elections.alaska.gov/ :

      “In Alaska, the list maintenance process is described in AS 15.07.130. This law requires the division to mail two notices—one of which is returned as undeliverable—and wait eight years before removing a voter from the list.
      Every year, the division mails notices to voters who have not voted for four years or contacted the division. Unless these voters respond to the mailer and ask to be removed, they remain registered.
      The division then sends a second notice by forwardable mail, but only if the first notice is returned to the division as undeliverable. If the voter does not reply to the second notice within 45 days, the voter’s registration is inactivated. The division can only remove these voters from the list if they do not vote or contact the division for another two general elections. The division removes these voters from the list in February of every year.

      Along with this process, the division removes voters whenever:
      They asked to be removed
      They have died
      They are convicted of a felony involving moral turpitude
      They have registered in another state, according to information from that state”

    • If you want to stay off the voter roll, you can no longer apply for the PFD. Anyone who applies for the PFD is automatically registered to vote.

  4. Beau,
    No worries. My buddy moved to Texas 5 years ago. Sold his home in S. Anchorage, cut all his ties to Alaska. Registered to vote in Texas, bought a home there. Contacted the Dept of Elections in Juneau several times to notify them of his status, and for 5 years now his family to include his 2 adult sons not living at home now, still get ballots in the mail.
    So the Dept of Elections will still find you.
    Something to ponder, this is just one family. I wonder how many thousands non-residents that get ballots that actually vote and mail them back.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.