| |||||||||||||||||||||
Alaska's at-large congressional district | |||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Turnout | 32.2%[1] | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Peltola: 50–60% 60–70% 70–80% 80–90% Palin: 50–60% 60–70% 70–80% | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The 2022 Alaska at-large congressional district special election was held on August 16 to fill the seat left vacant after the death of Republican incumbent Don Young.[2] Mary Peltola was elected in a 3-way race against former governor Sarah Palin and Nick Begich III in the election, becoming the first Alaska Native and woman to represent Alaska in the House.[3]
The election was the first to use Alaska's new ranked-choice voting (RCV) method, approved by voters in 2020. The winners of the top-four blanket primary advanced to the ranked-choice runoff election, but only three candidates competed (as Al Gross withdrew and endorsed Peltola). Peltola was declared the winner on August 31 after all ballots were counted.[4][5][6] Peltola's victory was widely seen as an upset in a traditionally Republican state. She became the first Democrat to win a statewide election in Alaska since 2008[7] and was sworn in on September 13.[8]
The results were praised by many pundits and activists. FairVote, a pro-RCV lobbying group, argued the low number of spoiled ballots proved Alaskans could use and understand the system.[9] Former presidential candidate Andrew Yang said the election served as a model for electing moderate candidates to office, regardless of partisan affiliation.[10]
By contrast, some scholars criticized the instant-runoff procedure for its pathological behavior,[11][12] the result of a center squeeze.[12][13][14] Although Mary Peltola received a plurality of first choice votes and won in the final round, a majority of voters ranked her last or left her off their ballot entirely.[12] Begich was eliminated in the first round, despite being preferred by a majority to each one of his opponents, with 53% of voters ranking him above Peltola.[12][15][16] However, Palin spoiled the election by splitting the first-round vote, leading to Begich's elimination and costing Republicans the seat.[12][17]
The election also exhibited nonmonotonic behavior,[17] where a voter's ballot has the opposite of its intended effect.[17][18] In this race, Begich lost as a result of at least 5,200 ballots with the ranking order Palin, Begich, Peltola; had those voters simply not participated at all, Begich would have beaten Peltola, a preferred outcome.[17][12] Similarly, had these Palin voters ranked Peltola first, Peltola would have lost to Begich, the same preferred outcome.[17][19]
In the wake of the election, a poll found 54% of Alaskans, including a third of Peltola voters, supported a repeal of RCV,[10] leading some observers to compare it to the 2009 Burlington mayoral election, where similar pathologies resulted in a 2010 initiative repealing the system.[20][21][22] Observers noted such pathologies would have occurred under Alaska's previous primary system as well, leading some to suggest Alaska adopt an alternative rule without this behavior.[11]
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Since Begich wins both … he is the Condorcet winner of the election … AK election also contains a Condorcet loser: Sarah Palin. … she is also a spoiler candidate
However, ranked-choice voting makes it more difficult to elect moderate candidates when the electorate is polarized. For example, in a three-person race, the moderate candidate may be preferred by a majority of voters to each of the more extreme candidates. However, voters with far-left and far-right views will rank the candidate in second place rather than in first place. Since ranked-choice voting counts only the number of first-choice votes (among the remaining candidates), the moderate candidate would be eliminated in the first round, leaving one of the extreme candidates to be declared the winner.
However, ranked-choice voting makes it more difficult to elect moderate candidates when the electorate is polarized. For example, in a three-person race, the moderate candidate may be preferred to each of the more extreme candidates by a majority of voters. However, voters with far-left and far-right views will rank the candidate in second place rather than in first place. Since ranked-choice voting counts only the number of first-choice votes (among the remaining candidates), the moderate candidate would be eliminated in the first round, leaving one of the extreme candidates to be declared the winner.
It's a good thing for Peltola that she didn't attract more Palin voters—she'd have lost. The strangeness continues. Peltola could have actually gotten more 1st choice votes in this election and caused herself to lose. How's that? Let's look. [...] Imagine if Peltola reached across the aisle and spoke directly to Palin voters. Imagine that she empathized with their position and identified issues they cared about that Palin and even Begich ignored. And let's say that as a consequence, Peltola got the first-choice votes of between 5,200 and 8,500 voters who would have otherwise ranked only Palin. What happens as a result? Palin would have gotten eliminated in the first round and Peltola would still not be able to beat Begich.