After a narrowly-failed attempt to change Alaska’s ranked choice system last month, opponents are now renewing efforts to revamp the voting system ahead of 2026.

This month, two groups filed petitions to get rid of open primaries and ranked-choice votes. One of these groups also wants to undo the provision that was meant to increase transparency in campaign financing disclosures.

Alaska is one of two states that uses the system statewide.

One Alaska Republican strategist said they wouldn’t be surprised “if the pro RCV group spends again 10, 12, 15 millions dollars and the group that wants to repeal is able to raise three or four million dollar and put it on the ballot.”

Alaska became the second state, after Maine, to adopt ranked-choice balloting for federal and local elections in 2020. The ballot measure established an open primary in which all candidates for an office were listed on the same ballot. The primary election is a one-person vote, and the top four candidates advance to the general elections.

Voters rank candidates in the general elections. In the event that no candidate wins a majority, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated. Votes for the second-placed candidate are then redistributed to the voters. The cycle continues till one candidate receives a majority.

The 2020 ballot measure included a component that aimed to tackle dark money and offer greater transparency about how individuals or groups receive contributions.

The first time it was used in 2022, the system played a major role in both the regular and special House elections of that year.

Rep. Mary Sattler Peltola, D-Alaska, won the elections over two Republican candidates. She became the first Democrat in 50 years to represent Alaska in Congress. Her victory caused a backlash from Republicans, who called ranked-choice balloting confusing and demanded its repeal.

The petition to put an initiative repealing it on this year’s ballot was signed by a large number of people, but fell short due to one of the narrowest margins across the country. This is despite Peltola losing to Rep.-elect Nick Begich, R-Alaska, and despite the fact that the groups involved in the effort were slowed down by campaign finance violation.

A recount confirmed that the measure had failed by 664 votes. The original tally was out of over 300,000 votes cast. The issue, while not directly partisan in nature, has become increasingly polarizing.

Robert Dillon said that the results show Alaskans split their party tickets and voted for each race separately, rather than voting for the entire ticket. Pelota’s campaign to stop the repeal of the law performed better in Alaska than Harris.

The supporters of ranked-choice spent nearly $14 million, while opponents raised about $150,000.

Anchorage Daily News, which received both petitions, reported that two groups are now looking to repeal the ranked-choice system and the open primary.

Phillip Izon II is behind the other, and he also worked on 2024’s ballot measure. This ballot measure would eliminate ranked-choice and open primaries.

Izon, in an email to The Hill, said that he had worked on campaigns across the country opposing ranked choice voting.

He said: “I think my efforts have played a part in the failure of RCV across the U.S. At a cost of 150 million dollars, this is a significant loss for RCV efforts throughout the country.” “I intend to remove the system from Maine, Alaska, and other places where it was forced upon Americans. Even Oakland, which has used RCV for over 14 years, is looking to get rid of it.

Former state Rep. Ken McCarty filed a second proposed that would eliminate both the voting system as well as the campaign finance provision of the 2020 ballot measure.

Bernadette W., senior advisor for the campaign to repeal the 2020 ranked choice ballot measure, said that $14 million in outside money was spent on a series of lies about ranked choice voting. “The reality is ranked-choice disenfranchises voters and discriminates them, and we will continue to fight against that no matter how often we come back.”

Wilson responded that many voters do not understand the system.

There are many people who don’t understand ranked-choice vote. They do not vote all the way down. They exhaust their ballots. Wilson stated, “We hear it all the time and we can see the numbers.”

The supporters of ranked choice voting argue that it allows for a smoother running government. They point to the Alaska state Legislature, which is less visible.

In the last few elections, the majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate was a cross-party coalition made up by Republicans, Democrats and Independents. The bipartisan majority is unlike any other majority in the state legislature. It functions differently, as it has several issues in common that bind them together. This puts a more moderate group from both sides in control.

Amber Lee, a Democratic strategist, credited the system with causing more moderate state lawmakers to be elected. She said that this is more representative of Alaska.

She said that “ranked-choice voting” continues to be a major factor in the election process. We were able retain it once again. “We retained it and I am happy that we did, because I believe it will bring in more independents, more moderate Republicans, more moderate progressives and, I believe, this is what Alaskans desire.”

Dillon, a former staffer of Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R), explained that a “Trump bump,” a 10 per cent increase in turnout among Republican-dominated areas and a drop of 10 per cent in rural areas made up primarily of Alaska Natives or Democrats, explains why this year’s result was so close.

He said that if the turnout had been similar to what it was in 2010, the margin of defeat for the repeal initiative would be larger.

Dillon, in reference to the new efforts at repealing the law, said: “We’ll wait and see what Alaskans think about it.” “They are clearly not listening Alaskans. The Republican Party is not listening to voters who said, “Look, we want this to stay.” That’s the message they didn’t take away.”

While opponents of the electoral system have long claimed that it is a confusing and complex system, requiring too much education. For former Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell, (R), said that a partisan system was a better method to show off the best candidates.

People who say “Well, it is better to count