James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

In a pair of hearings this week, Anchorage Superior Court Judge Kevin Saxby, an appointee of former Gov. Sean Parnell, set the trial date after an extended back-and-forth with the attorneys involved in the case.

“We will plan for a trial to begin on Nov. 27, and we’ll reserve two and a half weeks on the calendar just in case cross-examinations take longer than you think they will,” he told attorneys on Thursday morning.

LeDoux, her former chief of staff, and the son of the former chief of staff are accused of soliciting and encouraging people who did not live in LeDoux’s district to vote for her in elections that year.

LeDoux represented Kodiak in the Alaska House of Representatives from 2005 through 2008, then moved to Anchorage and represented the district that includes Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson from 2013 through 2021.

After being accused of multiple felonies and misdemeanors in March 2020, she lost her re-election campaign.

LeDoux’s former chief of staff, Lisa Simpson, is also accused of multiple election-related crimes. She unsuccessfully ran for state House last year and withdrew from the race after finishing third in the primary election.

Simpson’s son, Caden Vaught, is the third person facing charges. Earlier this week, Judge Catherine Easter issued a bench warrant after Vaught failed to appear for a Tuesday hearing and his attorney said he had been unable to contact him. Saxby waived that warrant Thursday.

LeDoux’s attorney did not respond to a phone message after Thursday’s hearing.

Since the charges were announced in March 2020, LeDoux has maintained her innocence and has previously said she looks forward to a trial at which she intends to clear her name. She declined additional comment Thursday.

The charges against LeDoux were the result of an investigation that began in August 2018 when the Alaska Division of Elections alerted the Alaska State Troopers about irregularities with absentee ballot requests in LeDoux’s district before the upcoming primary election.

One of those irregularities: 17 voters requesting absentee ballots from a single mobile home in East Anchorage.

Troopers contacted voters in the area and got help from the FBI as they sought text messages sent by LeDoux, Simpson, Vaught and others.

According to excerpts published in charging documents and the state’s account of events, those text messages “raised concerns that LeDoux had solicited and/or encouraged people who did not live in her district to vote in the House District 15 primary and general elections in 2018 and 2014.”

A year after the initial charges, an Anchorage judge dismissed two misdemeanors linked to the 2014 race, leaving only issues related to the 2018 elections.

The COVID-19 pandemic postponed trials across the state, including matters related to LeDoux’s case. Scheduling conflicts have also postponed the resolution of the issue.

With three defendants and the state involved in this case, various judges have had problems coordinating times when all attorneys and the defendants are available.

The scheduling hearings have offered little new information about the case itself, but on Thursday, Saxby suggested that pretrial motions could be due in late September.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

A Superior Court ruling that upheld the legislative eligibility of Rep.-elect Jennie Armstrong, D-Anchorage, is being appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court.

Late Tuesday, defeated Republican candidate Liz Vazquez and four supporters filed the appeal with the state’s high court, asking justices to overturn the Monday decision by Judge Herman Walker.

The Alaska Legislature convenes Jan. 17, and the plaintiffs asked for expedited consideration by the Supreme Court, which granted that request later Tuesday. Oral arguments have been scheduled for 12:30 p.m. Friday.

Vazquez is being represented by attorneys Stacey Stone, Richard Moses and Anna Cometa, who declined comment Wednesday morning.

In a preliminary document, Vazquez’s attorneys say Walker’s decision incorrectly applied the Alaska Constitution and state law.

They also contend Walker erroneously used a 1909 Montana Supreme Court decision when making his ruling and inappropriately based the start of Armstrong’s Alaska residency on her “emotional decision to make Alaska her home.”

The Alaska Constitution requires prospective legislators to have lived in the state for three years before registering as a candidate for office.

State law provides that a voter’s residency begins “by the act of removal joined with the intent to remain in another place.”

To date, the Alaska Supreme Court has not interpreted the phrase “act of removal.”

In written arguments, attorneys Scott Kendall and Samuel Gottstein — representing Armstrong — contended that Armstrong’s residency began in May 2019, when she decided to move in with her future husband, Ben Kellie of Anchorage.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs say her residency began in June 2019, because she left the state after her decision in order to gather personal belongings.

The difference matters because Armstrong filed for office June 1 of this year, and a June residency date would make her ineligible to serve.

The Alaska Legislature is closely divided between a Republican caucus and one that includes independents and Democrats.

Armstrong defeated Vazquez by 10 percentage points in the November general election for the state House district covering West Anchorage, including Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport.

When she sued in December, citing reporting by the Alaska Landmine website, Vazquez requested that result be thrown out and she be awarded the victory.

Armstrong’s attorneys have previously said they believe that result is unlikely but that a ruling in Vazquez’s favor could result in the seat being declared vacant, which would allow Gov. Mike Dunleavy to appoint a replacement, or a new election could be ordered.

If Walker’s decision is confirmed by the high court, Armstrong would fill the term.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

An Anchorage Superior Court Judge has ruled that Wasilla Republican Rep. David Eastman’s membership in the Oath Keepers does not violate the Alaska Constitution’s disloyalty clause because of First Amendment protections for free speech.

The decision, which may be appealed, means Eastman may continue serving in the Alaska Legislature. Eastman was re-elected in November.

In a 49-page order issued Friday morning, Judge Jack McKenna said the Oath Keepers — labeled an antigovernment militia by the federal government — “are an organization that has, through words and conduct, taken concrete action to attempt to overthrow by violence the United States Government.”

That meets the standards for disloyalty under Article XII, Section 4 of the Alaska Constitution, which says that someone who aids or belongs to an organization that advocates the forcible overthrow of the U.S. government is barred from holding office here.

But the ruling doesn’t end there. The First Amendment must be considered, McKenna said: “The court further finds that Rep. Eastman is a member of that organization, but that he does not and did not possess a specific intent to further the Oath Keepers’ words or actions aimed at overthrowing the United States government. The court therefore finds that he is not disqualified from holding public office by Article XII, Section 4.”

The decision comes in response to a lawsuit filed by a Matanuska-Susitna Borough resident, Randall Kowalke, who challenged Eastman’s eligibility for office under the disloyalty clause.

A ruling in Kowalke’s favor could have prevented Eastman from taking office.

“We’re obviously disappointed by the outcome and need to figure out our next steps,” said Goriune Dudukgian, who represented Kowalke at a seven-day bench trial.

An appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court has been expected, but Dudukgian said a decision on whether or not to appeal will not take place until after Christmas.

“We obviously have to make a quick decision,” he said.

Eastman did not respond to a text message seeking comment but has been actively fundraising for his legal defense. In emails sent to supporters, he solicited donations and suggested that he could spend as much as $300,000 on his case. A fundraising dinner had been scheduled for Friday night in Wasilla.

McKenna’s order has been placed on hold pending an appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court, meaning Eastman is not yet fully clear to take office. The Alaska Legislature convenes Jan. 17.

The Alaska Division of Elections was also a party to the lawsuit, and McKenna’s final order did not address the division except to say that its role is resolved by the broader decision.

“The Division of Elections takes no position on the merits of these claims. As ordered by the Court, the certification of the House District 27 election will be delayed until there is another order,” said Patty Sullivan, communications director for the Alaska Department of Law.

McKenna’s findings are a new interpretation of the Alaska Constitution’s disloyalty clause, which has never before been tested in court, and go beyond the clause’s plain language. The clause was written during the anticommunist Red Scare of the 1950s.

Intended to target the Communist Party of the United States, the clause declares that membership alone is enough to rule someone ineligible for public office in Alaska.

Subsequent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court found that the First Amendment protects speech and association to a greater degree than envisioned by the authors of the Alaska Constitution, and McKenna took those rulings into account.

“The court holds that Alaska’s disqualification for disloyalty clause must be interpreted in harmony with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,” he said.

In order for a person to be barred from public office under the disloyalty clause, he said, “there must be ‘knowing affiliation with an organization possessing unlawful aims and goals, and a specific intent to further those illegal aims.’”

The latter part of that statement was taken from a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirming that nonviolent action is protected by the First Amendment.

McKenna had hinted at the direction of his ruling with a mid-trial request for additional briefing on the intersection of the disloyalty clause with U.S. constitutional amendments.

Dudukgian argued that the 1982 Supreme Court decision and similar cases aren’t relevant because the case is about Eastman’s qualifications, not his ability to join a group. McKenna disagreed.

“Even under rational basis review, interpreting Article XII, section 4 to bar a person from office for mere membership in an organization violates the First Amendment,” he said.

He concluded that the Oath Keepers did intend violent action and the overthrow of the U.S. government during the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, but he also found that Eastman did not interact with or support the Oath Keepers during the insurrection.

Eastman didn’t interact with the group’s leaders or other Oath Keepers before or during the insurrection, and he didn’t enter the restricted grounds around the Capitol during the insurrection, the trial showed.

“Based upon the evidence presented at trial, the court does not find that Rep. Eastman had a specific intent to aid the Oath Keepers in planning for January 6. Nor does the court find that Rep. Eastman had a specific intent to aid the Oath Keepers’ actions on January 6,” McKenna said.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

“My perspective is that we’re preserving the Constitution, and it’s — I wouldn’t even call it insurrection, I would call it a counter-revolution against an insurrection. … I consider the left to be an insurrection,” Rhodes said.

Rhodes, who created the conservative antigovernment organization, was found guilty of seditious conspiracy by a Washington, D.C., jury last month in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Rhodes’ testimony came as a defense witness for Eastman, a Wasilla Republican who is defending against a lawsuit that claims Eastman’s life membership in the Oath Keepers violates the disloyalty clause of the Alaska Constitution. The lawsuit was filed in July by Randall Kowalke, a Matanuska-Susitna Borough resident.

Tuesday was the sixth day of a bench trial intended to determine whether or not the Oath Keepers, who have been linked to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, advocate the overthrow of the U.S. government.

The disloyalty clause prohibits a public official from belonging to or aiding an organization that advocates the forcible overthrow of the government. If Eastman has violated that clause, he could be barred from taking office when the Legislature reconvenes in January.

Rhodes said under questioning from Eastman attorney Joe Miller that he hoped Trump would activate the Insurrection Act, which would allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, in order to eliminate the results of the 2020 election, which he views as fraudulent. A new vote could then be held, he said.

No court has upheld the idea that the last presidential election was fraudulent, but when asked about that fact, Rhodes said he hopes the U.S. Supreme Court, in the as-yet-unresolved Moore v Harper case, will do so.

That case revolves around the idea that states may nullify federal election laws and conduct elections by whatever rules they choose.

Before the events of Jan. 6, Rhodes wrote that there would be a “bloody civil war” if Trump failed to invoke the Insurrection Act.

In private text messages, he urged some Oath Keepers to be ready to fight and that “the final defense is us and our rifles.”

Kowalke’s attorneys have argued that the subsequent insurrection at the Capitol proves those words were a call to imminent action, but Rhodes said on Tuesday that he didn’t intend them that way.

“I was pointing out that this is where it’s gonna lead,” Rhodes said. “There’s a big difference between advocating something and wanting something, and predicting something.”

He said he believed armed Oath Keepers would be needed to act as security if Trump called them into duty via the Insurrection Act.

After Rhodes, Miller called attorney John Eastman to testify. On Monday, the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection recommended the U.S. Justice Department bring criminal charges against Eastman, a legal expert who advised former President Trump.

Eastman, unrelated to David Eastman, said he believes Rhodes’ words and actions fall short of the standard needed to rule speech illegal under the protections offered by the First Amendment.

He said he believes Rhodes and other Oath Keepers were not inciting imminent action.

Under cross-examination, Eastman admitted that he had billed the defense team $8,000 for his work on the case, plus an additional amount for work done by others in his law firm.

Goriune Dudukgian, representing Kowalke, said those payments speak to Eastman’s credibility as an expert witness.

After John Eastman concluded his testimony, David Eastman returned to the stand for a final round of questioning by Miller.

The Wasilla representative said he does not consider himself to be anti-government and does not want to overthrow the government.

His defense rested its case, after Eastman concluded by saying his greatest concern is his belief that freedom of speech is under attack.

Closing arguments are scheduled to begin at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, with McKenna expected to rule by the end of the year. An appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court is expected regardless of the result.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

The Oath Keepers count Rep. David Eastman, R-Wasilla, as a lifetime member, and Tuesday marked the first day of a bench trial to determine whether Eastman is ineligible to serve in the Legislature because of that membership.

If Anchorage Superior Court Judge Jack McKenna concludes that the Oath Keepers advocate the overthrow by force of the U.S. government, Eastman — a six-year incumbent and the victor of a November election for a state House seat — could be barred from taking office.

Jon Lewis, an expert in domestic extremism at George Washington University, testified by teleconference as the trial’s first witness and said that there is no doubt that the Oath Keepers, as a group, advocate the overthrow by force of the U.S. government, as demonstrated by their actions before and after the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

“My opinion is that both before and during Jan. 6, the Oath Keepers called for and attempted to execute a plan that would have resulted in the overthrow of the U.S. government on Jan. 6,” he said.

To support his argument, he cited the federal charges brought against the leaders of the Oath Keepers, including its founder, Stewart Rhodes, who was convicted of seditious conspiracy and other crimes associated with the insurrection.

“I would assert, as someone who’s reviewed every single one of these cases … that the totality of the evidence, as presented by the Department of Justice in these seditious conspiracy cases, clearly shows a conspiracy to, in some substance, prevent the peaceful transfer of presidential power, which would result in the overthrow of the U.S. government,” he said.

Defending Eastman is attorney Joe Miller, who asked Lewis to compare the size of the Oath Keepers organization to the number of members charged in connection to the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Could those few dozen members be aberrations from the thousands of people counted on the group’s rosters nationwide?

“I would simply say, anyone who has followed even in passing the public statements of Rhodes from 2016 until present, anyone who has opened a website once, who has looked at their Facebook or Twitter accounts before they were banned — there is there’s no gray area when it comes to the true goals and motivations of the Oath Keepers,” Lewis said.

On further cross-examination, Miller asked whether Lewis was aware of any communications or statements from the Alaska chapter of the Oath Keepers that could in any way be interpreted as advocating the overthrow of the government by force or violence.

“No,” Lewis said, adding upon further questioning that he isn’t aware of any communication from the Alaska chapter that repeated any of Rhodes’ calls to action against the government.

The trial is expected to last into next week — and possibly longer, depending upon weather conditions in Palmer and other possible delays. The proceeding is the result of a lawsuit filed in July by Randall Kowalke, a Matanuska-Susitna Borough resident.

Kowalke is being represented by attorney Goriune Dudukgian of the Northern Justice Project, who presented a brief opening statement before yielding to Lewis. Miller deferred his opening remarks until Dudukgian wraps up his case.

Under the standards for disqualification, the burden is on the plaintiffs to prove that Eastman has violated the constitution.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy said on Tuesday that he hasn’t been following the Eastman case but is concerned about the implications.

“I think like a lot of folks, I’m concerned that you could be excluded from running or your election could be canceled as a result of associations. So we’ll see how this trial pans out, but I think everyone should be concerned,” he said.

“We’ve got to be very, very careful, because that can be a very slippery road for a lot of us,” Dunleavy said.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

Final unofficial results will not be available until 4 p.m. Wednesday, when the division implements the state’s new ranked choice sorting system, but voting trends have made the results clear in most races.

With 264,994 votes counted, incumbent Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy had 50.3% of the vote for governor, well above his leading challenger, Democratic candidate Les Gara, who had 24.2%. Independent candidate Bill Walker had 20.7% and Republican challenger Charlie Pierce had 4.5%.

Friday was the deadline for absentee ballots sent from within the United States to arrive and be counted. Ballots are counted by the elections division’s five regional offices, and by the end of the day Friday, most offices had finished counting all ballots that had arrived through Wednesday.

A few hundred ballots sent from international destinations could be added to the count if they arrive by Nov. 23, but it appears all but certain that the remaining ballots are too few to alter the governor’s race, where Dunleavy has a margin large enough that ranked choice sorting will not take place.

In races where no candidate earns at least 50% of the vote, the lowest finisher is eliminated, and voters who supported that person have their votes redistributed to their second choices. That process continues until only two candidates are left, and the person with the most votes wins.

In the U.S. Senate and U.S. House races, no candidate is expected to finish with more than 50% of the vote.

For U.S. House, Democratic incumbent Mary Peltola had 48.7% of the vote, ahead of Republican challengers Sarah Palin (25.8%) and Nick Begich (23.4%) and Libertarian challenger Chris Bye (1.7%).

While the combined totals of Palin and Begich would surpass Peltola’s tally, a special election in August showed the number of Begich voters willing to support Palin with second-choice votes was too small for her to overtake Peltola. Pre-election opinion polling showed little change in opinions since August.

In the race for U.S. Senate, incumbent Republican Lisa Murkowski led all challengers with 43.3%. Her main challenger, Republican Kelly Tshibaka, led on Election Day, but Murkowski erased that deficit by the end of the day Friday with late-counted absentee and early votes. By the end of the day Friday, Tshibaka had 42.7%, trailing by 1,658 votes out of 259,747 cast in the race.

When ranked choice voting begins, Murkowski is expected to receive the majority of the second-choice votes cast by supporters of the third-place finisher, Democratic candidate Patricia Chesbro (10.4%). Many supporters of the fourth-place finisher, Republican Buzz Kelley (2.9%), are expected to back Tshibaka, but those votes are not expected to be sufficient for Tshibaka to win.

Legislative races

Of the 59 races on the ballot for the state House and Senate, nine were unresolved Friday night, including two in the state Senate and seven in the state House.

Complete tossups

In South Anchorage, former Republican Senate President Cathy Giessel narrowly leads a three-way race that also features incumbent Republican Sen. Roger Holland and Democratic candidate Roselynn Cacy.

Giessel had 33.6% of the vote, Holland 33.1% and Cacy 32.9% as of Friday night. Elections officials said they had counted all early votes, questioned ballots and absentee ballots received through Wednesday, Nov. 16.

A relative handful of ballots remain uncounted in the race, which will be decided when elections officials calculate ranked choice sorting on Nov. 23.

Democrats and moderate Republicans seeking to create a coalition majority in the Senate have said they are waiting on the results of Giessel’s race.

“Because of that, there’s really not been a lot of definitive movement on (Senate organization),” said Sen. Donny Olson, D-Golovin, and the only legislator not on this year’s ballot.

In the state House, two Anchorage races and one in the Mat-Su had no likely winner.

For the district surrounding the Alaska Zoo, nonpartisan candidate Walter Featherly has 45.5% of the vote, followed by Republicans Julie Coulombe (38.7%) and Ross Bieling (15.4%). Ranked choice voting will decide the winner of the race; if sufficient Bieling supporters chose Coulombe as a second choice, she will overtake Featherly.

In the Taku-Campbell district around Campbell Lake, Democratic candidate Denny Wells has 46.6% of the vote, leading incumbent Republican Rep. Tom McKay, who has 38.8% of the vote. A third Republican has 14.1% of the vote. Ranked choice sorting will result in many of those votes going to McKay.

In the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, four Republicans are competing for a newly redrawn Wasilla district. Republican Jesse Sumner has 36.7% of the vote, but three other Republicans have substantial totals, and the race will be decided with Wednesday’s ranked choice sorting.

Likely winners

In addition to the four tossup races, there are five races that are unresolved but have likely winners based on voting patterns.

In the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, incumbent Republican Sen. David Wilson has 44.5% of the vote in his race for re-election, but Republican challenger Stephen Wright has 29% of the vote and could overtake Wilson if he receives enough second-choice votes when fellow Republican challenger Scott Clayton (25.3%) is eliminated in ranked choice sorting.In the House district covering Anchorage’s Government Hill and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Republican incumbent Rep. David Nelson has 44% of the vote, ahead of Democratic challengers Cliff Groh (35.3%) and Lyn Franks (20.3%), but Groh is expected to receive the second-choice votes of most Franks supporters. Those are expected to make Groh the winner.In northeast Anchorage, just south of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Republican Stanley Wright has 50.7% of the vote in a head-to-head race against Democrat Ted Eischeid, who has 48.9%. The difference between the two candidates is just 67 votes, and late-counted absentee ballots have favored Democrats, but there likely are too few ballots remaining to be counted in the district for Eischeid to overtake Wright.In East Anchorage, Democratic candidate Donna Mears has 50.1% of the vote in a head-to-head race against Republican Forrest Wolfe, who has 48.8%. The margin between the two candidates is 152 votes, and late-counted votes have gone in Mears’ favor, but some ballots remain uncounted.In the district around Big Lake, in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, incumbent Republican Rep. Kevin McCabe has 45% of the vote. Republican challenger Doyle Holmes has 34.4% and Democratic challenger Joy Mindiola has 20%. It isn’t clear who — if anyone — Mindiola’s supporters have picked as their second choice.

Legislative victors

The remaining 50 races had clear winners as of Friday night:

Senate races

Senate District A – Incumbent Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, defeated Republican challenger Mike Sheldon, 68.8%-30.5%.

SD B – Incumbent Sen. Jesse Kiehl, D-Juneau, was unopposed.

SD C – Incumbent Sen. Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, had 56.2%, defeating two Republican challengers.

SD D – Republican Jesse Bjorkman had 45.8% of the vote in a three-way race also featuring Republican Tuckerman Babcock (41.6%) and nonpartisan candidate Andy Cizek (11.7%), each seeking to replace Republican Senate President Peter Micciche in the northern Kenai Peninsula. Cizek’s supporters are expected to favor Bjorkman with second-choice votes, and Babcock conceded victory to Bjorkman on social media the day after the election.

SD F – Rep. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage (54.5%), defeated Democratic challenger Janice Park (45.3%) in a race to replace Sen. Josh Revak, R-Anchorage.

SD G – Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage, won re-election to a midtown Anchorage seat, defeating Republican challenger Marcus Sanders by 13 points.

SD H – Sen. Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, conceded defeat to Rep. Matt Claman, D-Anchorage, on Friday in a West Anchorage race that was one of the most closely watched Senate races in the state. Claman had 51.9% of the vote to Costello’s 47.8%.

SD I – Democratic candidate Löki Tobin defeated undeclared-party challenger Heather Herndon by 34 points in the race to replace Senate Minority Leader Tom Begich, D-Anchorage.

SD J – Forrest Dunbar, a Democratic member of the Anchorage Assembly, had just over 50% of the vote in the race for a newly created state Senate district in Anchorage, defeating Democratic challenger and Rep. Geran Tarr (16.7%), and Republican challenger Andrew Satterfield (32.7%).

SD K – Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, won re-election, defeating Republican challenger John Cunningham by 16 points.

SD L – Rep. Kelly Merrick, R-Eagle River, defeated Rep. Ken McCarty, R-Eagle River, by almost 17 percentage points in the race to replace Sen. Lora Reinbold, R-Eagle River.

SD M – Senate Majority Leader Shelley Hughes defeated Democratic challenger Jim Cooper by more than 52 points, one of the widest results in the state.

SD O – Sen. Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, defeated Republican challenger Doug Massey, 51.8-47%.

SD P – Sen. Scott Kawasaki, D-Fairbanks, defeated two Republican challengers by earning 51.1% of the vote.

SD Q – Sen. Robb Myers, R-North Pole, was re-elected after earning 62.6% of the vote against a nonpartisan challenger and a member of the Alaskan Independence Party.

SD R – Sen. Click Bishop, R-Fairbanks, defeated a Republican challenger and an AIP challenger with 56.8% of the vote despite being censured by local Republicans.

SD S – Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel and the longest-serving member of the Alaska Legislature, won another term after receiving 64.6% of the vote.

SD T – Sen. Donny Olson, D-Golovin, was the only legislator not subject to re-election this year. In all 59 other races, redistricting changed the boundaries of the legislative district enough to mandate a new election.

House races

House District 1 – Rep. Dan Ortiz, I-Ketchikan, defeated Republican challenger Jeremy Bynum, 52.4-47.3%.

HD 2 – Nonpartisan candidate Rebecca Himschoot defeated Republican Kenny Skaflestad, 58.3-41.4%, in the race to replace Rep. Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, D-Sitka.

HD 3 – Rep. Andi Story, D-Juneau, was unopposed.

HD 4 – Rep. Sara Hannan, D-Juneau, won re-election by almost 60 percentage points.

HD 5 – Speaker of the House Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak, defeated Republican challenger Benjamin Vincent by more than 22%.

HD 6 – Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, won re-election with 52.1% of the vote against two challengers.

HD 7 – Republican candidate Justin Ruffridge, a pharmacist, defeated Rep. Ron Gillham, 52.6-46.5%.

HD 8 – Rep. Ben Carpenter, R-Nikiski, won re-election unopposed.

HD 9 – Rep. Laddie Shaw, R-Anchorage, defeated Democratic candidate David Schaff, 54.2-45.6%.

HD 10 – Republican Craig Johnson, a former member of the Alaska House, will return to the House after earning 51.5% of the vote in a race against a Libertarian and a Democrat.

HD 12 – Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, defeated Republican Jay McDonald, 59-40.1%.

HD 13 – Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, defeated Republican Kathy Henslee by 5% in a race that had been expected to be close. Henslee trailed by just 86 votes after Election Day, but late-counted absentee, early and questioned ballots favored Josephson.

HD 14 – Nonpartisan candidate Alyse Galvin, a two-time candidate for U.S. House, won election to the state House by getting 67% of the vote against Republican Nick Danger.

HD 16 – Democratic candidate Jennie Armstrong had 55% of the vote against Republican Liz Vazquez. Armstrong’s eligibility for office could be questioned in a lawsuit; a judge on Friday dismissed a legal challenge targeting Armstrong but suggested that it could be refiled after the race is certified complete.

HD 17 – Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage defeated Rep. Harriet Drummond, D-Anchorage, by just under 14% after the two Democrats in or near downtown were placed in the same legislative district during the once-per-decade redistricting process. Theirs was the only race where redistricted incumbents, put in the same district, both sought re-election. In all other cases, one of the incumbents dropped out before the election.

HD 19 – Democratic candidate Genevieve Mina defeated fellow Democrat Russell Wyatt by more than 52%.

HD 20 – Democratic candidate Andrew Gray had 54% of the vote in this four-way race that also included two Republicans and a Libertarian.

HD 23 – Jamie Allard, a Republican member of the Anchorage Assembly, won election with 61.5% of the vote in this race that also featured Republican Roger Branson.

HD 24 – Republican Dan Saddler, formerly a member of the state House, will return to the chamber after earning 52.6% of the vote in a three-way race that included Democratic candidate Daryl Nelson and another former Republican legislator, Sharon Jackson.

HD 25 – Rep. DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer and one of the longest-serving Republican members of the House, won re-election with almost 78% of the vote in a two-way race that featured another Republican.

HD 26 – House Minority Leader Cathy Tilton won re-election by the widest margin of any race in the state, defeating Libertarian Daniel Stokes by more than 62%.

HD 27 – Rep. David Eastman, R-Wasilla, won re-election with 51.4% of the vote against two Republican challengers. Eastman still faces a legal challenge to his eligibility, and a trial has been set for December. Certification of his victory will remain on hold until the case is resolved.

HD 29 – Rep. George Rauscher, R-Sutton, won re-election by 49%.

HD 31 – Democratic candidate Maxine Dibert had 49.1% of the vote in a race against Republican incumbent Rep. Bart LeBon (29.4%) and Republican Kelly Nash (20.7%). LeBon is not expected to pick up enough second-choice votes from Nash supporters in order to pass Dibert. Nash campaigned aggressively against LeBon and told supporters to not rank him second.

HD 32 – Republican Will Stapp won the race to replace Rep. Steve Thompson, R-Fairbanks, by earning 51.5% of the vote.

HD 33 – Rep. Mike Prax, R-North Pole, ran unopposed for re-election.

HD 34 – Republican Frank Tomaszewski has 49% of the vote against Democratic incumbent Rep. Grier Hopkins, D-Fairbanks (43.1%). A third Republican candidate is also in the race, and Tomaszewski will earn enough votes in ranked choice calculations to defeat Hopkins.

HD 35 – Democratic candidate Ashley Carrick has 53.5% of the vote in this West Fairbanks district, enough to win a four-way race to replace Rep. Adam Wool, D-Fairbanks.

HD 36 – Rep. Mike Cronk, R-Tok, won re-election with 65.4% of the vote in this vast Interior Alaska district.

HD 37 – Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, ran unopposed for re-election.

HD 38 – Democratic candidate Conrad “C.J.” McCormick ran unopposed to replace Rep. Tiffany Zulkosky, D-Bethel. A registered write-in challenger received less than 16% of the vote.

HD 39 – Rep. Neal Foster, D-Nome, won re-election with 51.2% of the vote thanks to late-arriving absentee ballots that leaned in his favor. At one point on Friday, he was ahead of AIP challenger Tyler Ivanoff by just three votes. Exiting the day, he leads by 108 out of 3,583 cast.

HD 40 – Independent Rep. Josiah Aullaqsruaq Patkotak ran unopposed for the seat and has won re-election.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

The two, who study spoiler effects in ranked choice elections, wrote their findings in a September paper, concluding that it was the first known example of a “no-show paradox” in an American ranked-choice election. The paradox? If Peltola had gotten more votes, she might have lost.

After the result, there was some criticism of ranked choice voting, including a comment from Arkansas U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, who called it a “scam.”

“These comments raise the question: is RCV some kind of crazy scam to rig elections?” they asked in their paper.

“The short answer is: No. (The long answer is: Nooooooo.),” they wrote.

Looking ahead, the two say it is possible to make strategic choices on a ranked choice ballot, but only if there is good pre-election polling.

“As a generic rule of thumb,” Graham-Squire said, “there isn’t really any good way — with the exception of this particular election.”

McCune is a professor of mathematics at William Jewell College in Missouri, and Graham-Squire works in the math department at High Point University in North Carolina.

They both say that because the Aug. 16 special election was so close to the November vote, and because three of the four candidates in both races are the same, the special election amounted to an enormous opinion poll with almost 189,000 participants, giving unusually good data about Alaskans’ actions.

The detailed results of that earlier election showed that if Begich had been in a head-to-head race with Peltola or in a head-to-head race with Palin, he would have won either contest.

“If I was someone who had voted for Palin previously and then put Begich second and Peltola third or not at all, I would be thinking hard right now about strategically voting and putting Begich first,” he said.

He and McCune, caution that in a ranked choice – also known as an instant runoff – election, it’s pretty hard to vote strategically because polls are inexact. And in this case, the electorate in August and the one in November will be different.

“I can only speak for myself, but I think most voting theorists would say that instant runoff voting, top four or not, is much less susceptible to strategic voting than plurality is,” McCune said.

“It’s difficult because you essentially need really good poll data, and this Alaska House election is a good case study of that,” he said.

There are signs that Democrats are already voting strategically in the U.S. Senate election.

In the Aug. 16 primary and in public opinion polls since then, Democratic candidate Patricia Chesbro has received less support than similar Democrats in prior statewide races.

Conversely, Republican incumbent Lisa Murkowski has polled in first place despite being censured by the Alaska Republican Party, which is backing a more conservative Republican, Kelly Tshibaka.

Chesbro said by text message that she doesn’t believe her performance is about her specifically, and that another Democrat would be in a similar situation.

Because Republicans outnumber Democrats in Alaska, Democratic voters seem prepared to back a preferred Republican over a Democrat who might align more with their values but would be less likely to win in a head-to-head matchup. (A third Republican in the race, Buzz Kelley, has suspended his campaign and is backing Tshibaka.)

A similar situation exists in the statewide race for governor, but there, the choices are less clear. Incumbent Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy was the frontrunner in August and has been the leader in opinion polls since the election.

Two challengers, Democratic candidate Les Gara and independent candidate Bill Walker, appear to be running close together in second.

Gara appears to have more first-choice support, but Walker could attract the votes of Republicans who are unwilling to support a Democrat.

“The decision to vote strategically really depends on how you think the election will go,” Graham-Squire said.

“Generally speaking, voting your actual feelings is the best bet,” he said, but if someone has doubts, break the race into head-to-head matchups.

In a head-to-head race, would Gara be more likely to beat Dunleavy, or would Walker be more likely to beat Dunleavy?

Finding what’s called the “Condorcet winner,” the person who wins all possible head-to-head matchups, can make sense, he said.

“In this way, instant-runoff elections are similar to a top-two primary system, where you may want to choose the candidate who is the most ‘electable,’ as opposed to the one who is your actual favorite,” Graham-Squire said.

What makes this — and other strategic-voting decisions — risky is that they are based on polling data that may be wrong. Voting strategically could mean accidentally contributing to the defeat of a candidate you prefer.

Gara and Walker have each urged their supporters to rank the other man second, and both believe they will need all of the votes of their friendly opponent in order to beat Dunleavy.

Walker has also released ads that repeat a statement from campaign poller Ivan Moore, who has said that in every one of his polls, Walker fares better than Gara in a head-to-head matchup against Dunleavy.

The ads do not show Moore’s other comments, which indicate Walker still loses that matchup.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

Former Alaska Attorney General-designee Ed Sniffen was indicted Monday by an Anchorage grand jury on three counts of third-degree sexual abuse of a minor.

Sniffen is scheduled to be arraigned Monday in Anchorage Superior Court, accused of having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl in 1991.

The relationship was first reported in 2021 following a joint investigation between the Anchorage Daily News and ProPublica.

At the time, Sniffen was acting as attorney general following the resignation of Attorney General Kevin Clarkson amid sexual harassment allegations uncovered by a different Daily News and ProPublica investigation.

Sniffen resigned days after Gov. Mike Dunleavy had appointed him Clarkson’s successor and as the Daily News was preparing to publish an article about the allegations.

Dunleavy has said he was unaware of the allegations against Sniffen and instructed incoming Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor to appoint a special investigator.

Investigator Gregg Olson, recommended three charges against Sniffen in May, leading to Sniffen’s indictment this week.

An attorney representing Sniffen was out of the office and unavailable for comment, his receptionist said Wednesday morning.

Olson offered only limited comments on Wednesday, saying that he expects the case to go to a jury and does not want to prejudice potential jurors.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.

The Alaska Division of Elections on Friday certified the state’s Aug. 16 special general election for U.S. House, confirming Democrat Mary Peltola as the winner.

Peltola will be sworn in as Alaska’s lone U.S. representative later this month after defeating Republican candidates Sarah Palin and Nick Begich III.

Though elections officials are still compiling statistics from the vote, political advisers, pollers and independent observers say there are five early lessons from Alaska’s first ranked choice election:

Ranked choice voting mostly worked

In results shared by the Division of Elections only 295 people cast ballots that couldn’t be counted for at least one candidate, including write-ins. That’s less than 0.2% of all votes.

This figure represents only “overvotes,” ballots with marks that couldn’t be counted. Some people also cast blank ballots.

“Clearly, people understood how to mark the ballot effectively,” said Chris Hughes, policy director of the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center, a national nonprofit devoted to informing the public about ranked choice voting.

“The overall (overvote) rate was honestly one of the lowest I’ve ever seen,” Hughes said.

That’s an indication that education campaigns by the division and by Alaskans for Better Elections — a nonprofit that encourages ranked choice voting — were successful.

A poll commissioned by the nonprofit found that 95% of voters reported receiving instructions on how to use ranked choice voting, and 85% of voters said it was simple.

We won’t know until next week how many of Palin’s voters and Peltola’s voters picked a second candidate, but more than 80% of Republican candidate Nick Begich’s supporters picked at least one additional candidate.

“Which is pretty solid, especially for the first time using ranked choice voting,” Hughes said.

About 6% of voters ranked only one or two candidates and had all of their options eliminated, creating what are known as “exhausted” ballots.

In some cases, that was because the voter didn’t like the remaining options. In others, it may have been because of confusion or out of protest, but it’s impossible to judge how many people fell into each category.

Palin, supported by former President Donald Trump, urged her supporters to rank only one candidate.

Tom Anderson of Optima Public Relations ran some of Palin’s advertising campaign and is working with some conservative legislative candidates.

“From the circles that I work within, they did not like the system, even if they were benefactors of it,” he said.

Ivan Moore of Alaska Survey Research, said his numbers indicate conservative Alaskans dislike ranked choice voting by a 6-1 margin, while moderates and progressives support it.

The election didn’t run perfectly. As many as seven rural communities may have had their ranked choice ballots excluded from the final result because they failed to arrive in Juneau by mail. Elections officials have said they will use express mail for the November general election.

And two rural polling places didn’t open at all on election day. In those cases, poll workers didn’t show up, and no one told election administrators until the day after.

Begich voters decided the result

Immediately after learning of her defeat, Palin blamed ranked choice voting, and some other Republicans followed suit.

Observers say her failure to sway Begich supporters was to blame.

“Mary didn’t win because of ranked choice voting. Mary won in the final equation because she was running against Sarah Palin and people didn’t like Sarah Palin,” Moore said.

Matt Larkin runs Dittman Research, which runs polls for Republicans in Alaska and said Palin is disapproved of by many voters, which explains why about half of Begich supporters voted for Peltola or no one at all after he was eliminated.

“I definitely think more Republicans chose not to rank than was expected,” said Sara Erkmann-Ward, a Republican consultant who tried to convince conservatives to rank multiple candidates.

Had more Begich supporters turned their second-choice votes in favor of Palin, she would be on her way to Washington, D.C., instead of Peltola.

Political parties had less influence

Begich was the preferred candidate of the Alaska Republican Party, which endorsed him while largely shunning Palin. Despite that support, he finished third among the three candidates and was the first eliminated.

The party also ran a “rank the red” campaign to encourage Begich and Palin supporters to rank the other as their second choice, but too few Republicans followed party instructions to give Palin the win after Begich was eliminated.

It’s premature to say the “rank the red” campaign failed, Larkin said, but “it’s probably clear that it could have worked better than it did.”

Erkmann-Ward, who worked on the campaign, said the outcome is “a natural outcrop” of the fact that political parties have been “kind of sidelined” throughout the election, not just in ranked choice voting.

The state’s new electoral system allows up to four candidates, regardless of party, to advance through the primary election.

In a special election like this one, that was particularly important because the state’s former laws allowed a political party to pick its special-election candidate without a primary election.

In this case, the Republicans may have picked Begich, and the Democratic establishment may have picked someone like Christopher Constant, who had significant early support from Anchorage party officials but faded as Peltola gained popularity in the primary campaign.

In future elections, the top-four primary means Republicans or Democrats may advance to November without party support, giving independent voters options that party leaders may disapprove of. In this election, that was Palin.

Niceness matters

In the runup to the election, Palin and Begich traded barbed comments in an attempt to sway Republican voters toward their side. Observers say that may have been counterproductive, with Palin’s comments alienating the Begich supporters she needed to win.

“I think that maybe one of the lessons learned on the Republican side coming out of this is that ranked choice really cannot work the way you want if two members of the same party are really heavily attacking one another,” Larkin said.

Peltola was on the sidelines of that intra-party conflict and maintained good relations with Palin throughout the campaign.

Peltola, a former state legislator, had a reputation for courtesy even before this year’s campaign, and one Alaska Public Media article described her attitude and reputation as a “superpower.”

Anderson said he believes that made a difference.

“She was untouchable because of her courtesy. I think people didn’t even want to go there,” he said.

He doesn’t expect that approach to last. Because Peltola won in August, she will be a target for both Palin and Begich in November, he said.

“I think the gloves are going to come off,” Anderson said, and added that he doesn’t think Palin and Begich will “make up” before the next election.

November will be different

Even if the candidates’ campaign styles may not change before November, pollers, observers and advisers say August’s results shouldn’t be directly applied to November.

Turnout is expected to be much higher in November than August, and moderate voters are more likely to participate.

Larkin used a football analogy, saying that any changes campaigns make now are akin to “halftime adjustments,” now that all sides have seen each other in action.

In addition, the November U.S. House election will include a fourth candidate, Libertarian Chris Bye, who could add a new wrinkle even though he received less than 1% of the primary-election vote.

It’s also a mistake, Larkin said, to think that August’s U.S. House results mean much for the statewide U.S. Senate or governor races.

“The composition of each field will create its own ‘weather,’” Larkin said.

And even with all the things we now know about ranked choice voting, the sheer uncertainty of a political campaign means almost anything can happen in the next two months.

“It’s Alaska politics. Heck, we could have an asteroid hit between now and then,” Erkmann-Ward said.

Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on Facebook and Twitter.