Posted inUncategorized

ElectoramaNews/2026-January

No Comments

Greetings! Happy New(-ish) Year! Welcome to the January 2026 edition of the ElectoramaNews! This month’s main feature: the proposed repeal of “Measure 2”, the 2020 measure that instituted RCV in Alaska. Also, we’ll cover some late-breaking news at the federal level.

Section01 — Main feature: Alaska RCV

edit | edit source]

See also: Alaska, 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in Alaska, 2020 Alaska Measure 2, and 2024 Alaska Measure 2

In November 2026, Alaskan voters will decide yet again whether to keep the top-four+RCV system created by Alaska Measure 2 from 2020. A second repeal initiative by Repeal Now is on the November ballot for voters in Alaska. Let’s explain how we got here…

It all began with RCV getting to Alaska in the first place. In 2019, Alaskans for Better Elections started gathering signatures for a measure (state id: “19AKBE”) which proposed a few things: converting Alaska‘s primary elections to a “top-four primary“, converting the general election to ranked-choice voting (or “RCV”), and requiring additional disclosures of donations to political campaigns.[1][2] Almost all primary elections were affected; only presidential primaries would continue to be party-based primaries. 2020 Alaska Measure 2 was on the ballot in November, and it received 50.55% of the vote, narrowly passing with a margin of 3,781 votes. It was, however, challenged in court shortly after the election. An Anchorage Superior Court judge upheld the measure in July 2021, and the Alaska Supreme Court later upheld the system’s constitutionality in Kohlhaas v. State (2022).[3][4]

In the August 2022 special general election, Nick Begich might have beaten Mary Peltola head-to-head, but he was squeezed out in a three-way RCV/IRV contest which included Sarah Palin.

Measure 2 was scheduled to begin in 2022, but the first implementation happened sooner than originally envisioned. In March 2022, longtime U.S. House Representative Don Young died unexpectedly, triggering a special election (June primary + August RCV general) while the regular 2022 cycle proceeded at the same time, with a regular August primary and November general election. In the June 2022 special primary, Republican Sarah Palin received the most votes so she advanced to the general. Republican Nick Begich III, independent candidate Al Gross, and Democrat Mary Peltola qualified as well, though Gross dropped out before the August election. In the August special general election, Peltola won, surprising many.[5] The surprise was in part because of Peltola rising from 10.1% of the vote in the June special primary, to getting 40.2% of the first-round vote in the special general election, and 36.8% of the vote in the regular top-four primary (held simultaneously).[5] It also became controversial because, according to the ranked ballots from the special general election, Begich was preferred to Peltola head-to-head by 8,697 votes, but was eliminated before many of those ballots could transfer under the IRV rules, and many ballots ended up “exhausted”.[5][6][7][8]

Peltola won the November 2022 general election as well, and that outcome was less controversial. Peltola decisively bested Begich pairwise in November, with 48.1% supporting Peltola over Begich, with 23.0% supporting Begich over Peltola, and with 28.8% not having a preference between the two candidates. Peltola went on to serve the remainder of Young’s term, and also serve a term of her own. Near the end of Peltola’s first full term in 2024, she faced another challenge from Nick Begich in a primary/general pair of elections.[9] Peltola received a majority of votes in the primary election in August 2024, but Begich won the general election in November.[9] In the general election, Begich led in the first round, and after transfers he finished with just over 50.0% compared to Peltola’s 47.6%.[9] It may be worth noting that Begich’s November 2024 margin of victory (7,876 votes) is similar to the 8,697-vote head-to-head advantage Begich had over Peltola in the August 2022 special election.[5]

The original 2020 Measure 2 (19AKBE) has faced persistent opposition. “Alaskans for Honest Elections” (not to be confused with “Alaskans for Better Elections“) were able to get a repeal measure on the 2024 ballot (state id “22AKHE”).[10][11] This measure faced a lawsuit led by Alaskans for Better Elections, but ultimately was allowed on the ballot.[12][13] Still, they suffered a narrow loss in the November election (yes repeal: 49.89%, no repeal: 50.11%, a margin of 743 votes).[14][15] Some fundraising reports from October 2024 showed the pro-RCV side outraising (and presumably outspending) the anti-RCV side by 100 to 1, but later reporting shows with the pro-RCV side (Alaskans for Better Elections and their allies) spending $15,772,135, and the anti-RCV side (Alaskans for Honest Elections and their allies) spending $713,255, a spending ratio of approximately 22 to 1.[16][14]

Shortly after the November 2024 election, a different opposition group (“Repeal Now”) filed a new repeal initiative (state id: “24ESEG”) in December 2024, which was approved for signature collection in February 2025.[17][18] Alaskans for Honest Elections also filed a separate repeal petition in 2024, but discontinued theirs in January 2025 to avoid confusion with Repeal Now’s effort.[19] Repeal Now’s 24ESEG was certified in December 2025 for the November 2026 ballot, though they face a lawsuit from Alaskans for Better Elections.[17][20][21]

So, Alaskans for Better Elections will be battling against Repeal Now over the fate of RCV in Alaska. Who will win (and what they will spend) in 2026 is anyone’s guess.

Section02 — reddit EndFPTP update

edit | edit source]

Main article: EndFPTP

The top-voted posts in January 2026 were What is Approval Voting? (by /u/ILikeNeurons with 86 points, 108 comments) and Record-high 45% identify as political independents as high-stakes midterm elections approach (by /u/ILikeNeurons with 36 points, 12 comments).

Section03 — Voting Theory Forum update

edit | edit source]

Main article: Voting Theory Forum

Here’s the threads that have gotten some activity on votingtheory.org in January:

Section04 — Center for Election Science updates

edit | edit source]

Main article: Center for Election Science

In January 2026, the Center for Election Science (or “CES“) continued working to develop relationships and institute policy changes in several initiatives. They have largely been working at the state level, but are also working with national organizations like the ACLU and the NAACP.

In Maryland, State Senator Mike McKay proposed and sponsored the Fair Districts for Maryland Act (SB 104), which changes how districts are drawn.[22] CES is also working with Senator McKay on an approval-voting pilot in Maryland’s 1st Congressional District. CES remains optimistic about the possibility for statewide change in Maryland with a fresh set of eyes in leadership, as last month saw new Speaker Joseline Peña-Melnyk being sworn in.[23]

In Utah, the 2026 legislative session began with a vacant seat left by Former Senator Daniel Thatcher, who resigned his seat after joining the Forward Party. His vacancy was filled in part through a “preference poll” conducted by the Forward Party in late 2025 which utilized approval voting and allowed poll respondents to “approve” as many as they liked. The poll was open to all District 11 voters, and resulted in the nomination of Emily Buss.[24] Governor Spencer Cox accepted the Forward Party’s choice, and Senator Buss was sworn in on January 20, 2026.[25] The process will serve as a good test case for other approval-voting related reforms as the session kicks off, though it should be noted that at least one Republican lawmaker disagrees with Buss’s appointment, and has proposed SB-194 to curb such appointments.[26]

In Iowa, State Auditor Rob Sand has begun educating fellow legislators about approval voting as a legally-viable alternative to RCV.[27] There is an anti-RCV sentiment in Iowa, shown in part by RCV being officially banned under House File 954, signed by Governor Kim Reynolds in June 2025.[28] With RCV being off the table (for now), the hope is that Iowa legislators and voters would be open to alternatives to RCV.

CES continues to work with the ACLU and NAACP on helping to frame electoral reform as a means for more broadly equitable representation, and to educate leaders in those organizations about the full spectrum of alternatives to choose-one voting methods.

Other news from CES:

Section05 — FairVote updates

edit | edit source]

Main article: FairVote

The folks over at FairVote celebrated the following in January:

For other news from FairVote, see :

Section06 — Equal Vote Coalition/STAR Action updates

edit | edit source]

Main article: Equal Vote Coalition

2025 was a tough year for Equal Vote Coalition, but ended on a bright note when the City of Astoria, Oregon used STAR Voting to fill a vacancy on their city council.[34] The folks at EVC are pretty excited about the work they’ve been able to do online. They have many videos in their production pipeline, and many folks in the wider electoral-reform community are pretty excited about the ongoing improvements to BetterVoting.com, which allows anyone to set up a poll using many different election methods.[35]

Other news from the Equal Vote Coalition and STAR Voting Action:

Section07 — Better Choices for Democracy

edit | edit source]

Main article: Better Choices for Democracy

Better Choices for Democracy (or “BC4D“) is a relatively new organization that promotes “Consensus Choice”, which is BC4D’s preferred name for Condorcet methods.[36] They have launched an app (see app.betterchoices.vote) to demonstrate to people how pairwise methods work. They are also pushing for jurisdictions that have considered using a top-three or top-four primaries to use “Consensus Choice” for the subsequent general election. They have published an explainer titled “Top Three or Top Four expands choice. Head-to-head matchups make elections fairer by treating every voter and candidate equally.“

BC4D-affiliated members have published opinion pieces recently in some notable online publications:

  • University of California, Berkeley: In a new white paper entitled “How to Make Every Voter Matter and Make Spoiler Effects Go Away”, Philosophy Professor and Better Choices Board Member Wes Holliday introduces “Consensus Choice”, and explains how it works and its benefits.[37]
  • University of California, Berkeley: Professor Holliday also published a more theoretical paper in January titled “The incompatibility of the Condorcet winner and loser criteria with positive involvement and resolvability“[38]
  • SCOTUSblog: In an editorial that posits that Supreme Court cannot protect against an “American Caesar”, BC4D Advisory Member Ned Foley suggests that only electoral reform can protect us.[39]
  • Election Law Blog: In a different dispatch, Foley also asks: “When will we recognize the necessity of electoral reform to protect against tyranny?“[40]

Other news from Better Choices for Democracy:

Section08 — Wikipedia updates

edit | edit source]

Main article: Wikipedia

Recent electoral reform article updates on English Wikipedia:

Section09 — Electorama/electowiki/EM/ES/ABIF

edit | edit source]

Main articles: Electorama, electowiki, Election-methods mailing list, Election-software mailing list, and ABIF

The EM list was pretty quiet for most of the month (except for your editor-in-chief promoting the “ElectoramaCall” and the “ElectoramaNews“, not to mention electorama on lemmy.world). Things picked up when Joe Malkevitch started the conversation about the Elkind/Han/Xia paper about “shortlisting”, which studies the way groups narrow down options in the process of coming to a single conclusion.

Here’s the election-methods list activity:

Section10 — additional news/other orgs

edit | edit source]

Other news

edit | edit source]

Here’s some other news from around the electoral reform space:

Other organizations

edit | edit source]

References

edit | edit source]

  1. ↑ “Petition Status: “Alaska’s Better Elections Initiative”; Initiative Id: 19AKBE ; AG File Number: 2019200578″. Division of Elections; State of Alaska. Retrieved January 26, 2026.

  2. ↑ Piper, Kelsey (November 19, 2020). “Alaska voters adopt ranked-choice voting in ballot initiative”. Vox. Vox Media, LLC. Archived from the original on November 20, 2020. Retrieved November 20, 2020.
  3. ↑ Brooks, James (July 30, 2021). “Judge says Alaska’s new ranked-choice voting system is legal”. Anchorage Daily News. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  4. ↑ “Kohlhaas v. State”. Alaska Law Review. April 2023. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  5. ↑ a b c d “U.S._Representative_(Special_General) (Alaska; 2022-08-16)”. (awt). August 16, 2022. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  6. ↑ “Real World RCV”. Real World RCV. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  7. ↑ robertjbrown. “Alaska special election ballots”.
  8. ↑ “What should I use to parse Alaska special election JSON data?”. reddit. 2023-03-30. Retrieved 2023-03-30.
  9. ↑ a b c “United States House of Representatives election in Alaska, 2024”. Ballotpedia. November 5, 2024. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  10. ↑ “Petition Status: “An Act to get rid of the Open Primary System and Ranked-Choice General Election” ; Initiative Id: 22AKHE ; AG File Number: 2023100126″. Division of Elections; State of Alaska. Retrieved January 26, 2026.
  11. ↑ “Alaska voters gave themselves the power to rank candidates. Why do some people want to repeal that?”. PolitiFact. June 17, 2024. Retrieved January 31, 2026.
  12. ↑ Downing, Suzanne (July 23, 2024). “Judge upholds petitions in repeal of ranked-choice voting, which means it will be on the ballot in November”. Must Read Alaska. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  13. ↑ “Sponsors of petition to repeal Alaska’s ranked choice voting score a partial win in court”. Alaska Public Media. June 11, 2024. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  14. ↑ a b “Alaska Ballot Measure 2, Repeal Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)”. Ballotpedia. November 5, 2024. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  15. ↑ Maguire, Sean (December 10, 2024). “Recount reaffirms Alaska voters’ retention of ranked choice voting and open primaries”. Anchorage Daily News. Retrieved January 31, 2026.
  16. ↑ Stremple, Claire (October 10, 2024). “Alaska ranked choice voting repeal effort outraised by a hundredfold, campaign finance filings show”. Alaska Beacon. Retrieved January 31, 2026.
  17. ↑ a b “Petition Status: “An Act to repeal a nonpartisan and open top four Primary election system and ranked-choice General election system; and to reestablish a partisan political Primary and change necessary and related appointment procedures; reestablish special runoff elections; and repeal and amend independent expenditure group requirements”; Initiative Id: 24ESEG”. Division of Elections; State of Alaska. Retrieved January 26, 2026.
  18. ↑ Downing, Suzanne (February 15, 2025). “Round II: Repeal of ranked-choice voting petition approved”. Must Read Alaska. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  19. ↑ Downing, Suzanne (January 14, 2025). “Phil Izon decides to drop his ranked-choice voting repeal petition, allowing second group to take lead”. Must Read Alaska. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  20. ↑ “Lt. Governor Nancy Dahlstrom Certifies Proper Filing of Ballot Initiative Petition 24ESEG”. Office of the Lieutenant Governor, State of Alaska. December 31, 2025. Retrieved January 27, 2026.
  21. ↑ DeMarban, Alex (January 22, 2026). “Ranked choice supporters accuse Alaska election officials of using ‘untrue’ language in repeal ballot measure”. Anchorage Daily News. Retrieved January 31, 2026.
  22. ↑ “MD SB104”. BillTrack50. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  23. ↑ Petrowich, Sarah (December 16, 2025). “Joseline Peña-Melnyk sworn in as Maryland’s new House Speaker”. WYPR. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  24. ↑ McKellar, Katie (December 12, 2025). “Utah Forward Party’s first-of-its-kind preference poll picks a winner to replace Sen. Thatcher”. News From The States. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  25. ↑ Cabrera, Alixel (January 20, 2026). “A third-party senator, a ‘teacher of the year’ and an ‘ordinary citizen.’ Meet Utah’s new lawmakers • Utah News Dispatch”. Utah News Dispatch. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  26. ↑ Woodruff, Daniel (January 26, 2026). “Third-party lawmaker’s recent election prompts new bill in Utah Legislature”. KSLTV.com. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  27. ↑ “Rob Sand’s Priorities for Iowa”. Rob Sand for Iowa. June 17, 2024. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  28. ↑ Ryan, Briana (June 5, 2025). “Iowa becomes the sixth state to ban ranked-choice voting this year”. Ballotpedia News. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
  29. ↑ “Raskin, Beyer, Welch Bill Would Bring Ranked Choice Voting to Congressional Elections Across America”. Congressman Jamie Raskin. September 12, 2024. Retrieved January 30, 2026.
  30. ↑ “Raskin, Beyer, Welch Introduce Bicameral Legislation to Expand Ranked Choice Voting to all Congressional Elections”. U.S. Representative Don Beyer. December 10, 2025. Retrieved January 31, 2026.
  31. ↑ Roth, Harry (December 12, 2025). “The Ranked Choice Voting Act reintroduced in Congress”. Stop RCV. Retrieved January 30, 2026.
  32. ↑ McHugh, Michael (January 26, 2026). “Salem council seeks to move ahead on ranked choice voting”. Salem News. Retrieved January 30, 2026.
  33. ↑ Oberstaedt, Matthew (January 21, 2026). “Ranked Choice Voting Day is on January 23!”. FairVote Action. Retrieved January 30, 2026.
  34. ↑ STAR Voting (December 6, 2025). “Astoria, Oregon: On December 1st, Oregon’s oldest city made history, using Score Then Automatic Runoff “STAR” Voting to fill a recently vacated seat on their City Council”. X (formerly Twitter). Retrieved January 29, 2026.
  35. ↑ “Create elections & polls that don’t spoil the vote”. BetterVoting. December 15, 2023. Retrieved January 29, 2026.
  36. ↑ “Consensus Choice Voting”. Better Choices for Democracy. Retrieved January 29, 2026.
  37. ↑ Holliday, Wesley H. (January 26, 2026). “How to Make Every Voter Matter and Make Spoiler Effects Go Away”. Better Choices for Democracy. Retrieved January 29, 2026.
  38. ↑ Holliday, Wesley H. (wesholliday@berkeley.edu) (January 23, 2026). “The incompatibility of the Condorcet winner and loser criteria with positive involvement and resolvability”. University of California, Berkeley. arXiv. Retrieved January 29, 2026.
  39. ↑ Foley, Edward (January 22, 2026). “Only electoral reform, not the Supreme Court, can protect against an American Caesar”. SCOTUSblog. Retrieved January 29, 2026.
  40. ↑ Foley, Ned (January 25, 2026). “When will we recognize the necessity of electoral reform to protect against tyranny? #ELB”. Election Law Blog. Retrieved January 29, 2026.

The ElectoramaNews is a monthly publication. Next month’s edition will be drafted publicly here: ElectoramaNews/2026-February. If you wish to suggest changes or additions to the publication, please contact User:RobLa, send mail to news@electorama.com, or (better yet) sign up for an electowiki account and make the changes you would like to see prior to publication.

Sign up on Substack to receive this newsletter in email form:



Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *