Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

How ranked-choice voting helped Mary Peltola make history in Alaska

Mary Peltola
Ash Adams for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Democrat Mary Peltola was declared the winner of a special election in Alaska on Wednesday, becoming the first Native American to serve in the House of Representatives and the first Democrat to hold the seat in 50 years.

And if it hadn’t been for the state’s switch to open primaries and ranked-choice voting, the result could have been quite different.


Two years ago, the voters of Alaska approved a ballot measure that created a unique election system that combines a “top four” primary with RCV. The state starts with a nonpartisan, open primary in which all candidates compete on one ballot and the four who amass the most votes advance to the general election, regardless of party.

Then, in the general election, the candidates compete in a ranked-choice election. Voters can rank the candidates in order of preference, and if no one receives a majority of the votes, the last-place candidate is eliminated and their support is redistributed to voters’ next choice. The process continues until someone has a majority.

In the June 11 primary, to replace the late Rep. Don Young, Peltola finished fourth, behind Republicans Sarah Palin and Nick Begich and independent Al Gross. After the primary was complete, Gross dropped out of the race, leaving just three candidates for the general election.

In the Aug. 16 general election, Peltola led after the initial ballot count with 75,761 votes, but just 40 percent of the total. Palin was second with 58,945, about 5,200 more than Begich. So Begich was eliminated and his ballots were redistributed per his supporters’ rankings. While Palin did pick up most of the Begich ballots (27,042), it wasn’t enough to overcome Peltola’s new total of 91,206. More than 11,000 Begich voters did not list a second choice on their ballots.

Made with Flourish

While the system has critics who argue RCV is too complicated, polls consistently show voters understand and like it.

Alaskans for Better Elections, which advocated for the new election system, commissioned an exit poll in conjunction with the special election. It found that 85 percent of voters found the ranked ballot to be “simple” or “very simple.” And 95 percent said they had received instructions on how to fill out the ballot.

“These are fantastic numbers - they really reflect the willingness of Alaskans to learn about our new system and understand the benefits,” said Jason Grenn, executive director for Alaskans for Better Elections. “It’s also a testament to the hard work of the Division of Elections and many organizations across the state who are determined to make sure our elections inspire confidence and work well for each and every Alaskan voter. We will continue to work with our fellow Alaskans to ensure these reforms are seen for what they are – nonpartisan, simple, and meant to put voters first.”

Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Alaska, however, tweeted his opposition to RCV, calling it a “scam,” following Palin’s loss.


Read More

AI chip
a computer chip with the letter a on top of it
Photo by Igor Omilaev on Unsplash

We Should Regulate AI to Make It Grow Faster

The debate over artificial intelligence has become divided between two powerful ideas: that we need a “moratorium” to slow AI until we can make it safe, and that regulating AI will slow the innovation we need for our economy and national security. Both concerns are legitimate. But “moratorium” and “slowing AI growth” are divisive terms: they reassure those concerned about AI's safety, economic and environmental consequences while alarming those who see AI competition and national security as urgent priorities. We need a different starting point—meaningful regulation that provides the safeguards necessary to protect people, communities and the environment while creating the conditions for AI to continue growing. The experiences of Europe and China challenge the assumption that regulation must slow AI.

China has combined increasingly detailed, technology-specific AI regulation with substantial government support for AI development. Recent studies provide evidence that this approach can promote innovation. One 2026 study of Chinese companies from 2017 through 2023 found that the creation of national AI innovation and development pilot zones significantly increased corporate digital transformation, in part through increased research and development, human capital and reduced transition costs. Another 2026 study, covering Chinese manufacturing companies from 2014 through 2024, found that the same policy significantly promoted the adoption of intelligent technologies.

Keep ReadingShow less
The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

A Brief History of Prevention Through Deterrence

The U.S. Border Patrol agency has evolved greatly over the years, shifting its focus to address changing national security concerns. It was originally established in 1924 to restrict illegal immigration by Chinese and European immigrants before moving to restrict alcohol smuggling during Prohibition. The agency adopted its current focus on illegal immigration from Mexico during the 1970s, when immigration pressures coincided with a severe economic recession in the United States. In 1994, the Border Patrol released a strategy document with the support of the Clinton administration which introduced an approach to immigration known as Prevention Through Deterrence. This tactic aimed to discourage border crossings by funneling immigrants through border entry points with harsh terrain, in contrast with previous policies based on arrest and apprehension post-entry.

Successful Prevention Through Deterrence is measured by fewer encounters and apprehensions at the border, indicating that illegal attempts to enter the country have been prevented and deterred. Barriers to entry are policed by a range of physical infrastructure like fences, vehicle barriers, and other blockades designed to stop illegal foot and vehicle traffic. These measures are supported by camera- and thermal-based surveillance systems as well as measures like deportation and criminal charges which impose legal consequences on migrants. The focus of Prevention Through Deterrence operations themselves is twofold: establishing control of high-traffic border sectors and using security measures to enable the seizure of contraband.

Keep ReadingShow less
A microphone in the foreground and a crowd, blurry in the background.

INC ‘26 gathered independent leaders in D.C. to unveil a seven-candidate slate, a Fulcrum Caucus strategy and new tools for corruption-free governance.

Getty Images, uschools

Independent Movement Unites at INC ’26 to Build National Power

From September 23–25, leaders from across the American independent political movement gathered at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C., for the fourth Independent National Convention (INC ’26). Produced by United Independents, the event brought together hundreds of participants representing political reform organizations, independent campaigns, alternative parties, civic initiatives and grassroots organizing efforts.

The gathering reflected the breadth of activity outside the traditional two-party system while addressing a persistent challenge: translating America's large independent constituency into greater political representation, institutional capacity, and coordinated action.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meeting, handshake and business people with deal in office for funding approval and success.

Four Reds and four Blues reached unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration, then presented them to Reps. Fitzpatrick and Suozzi. Here’s how it worked.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

On Immigration, Common Ground May Be Closer Than We Think

Immigration has become one of the issues pulling Americans apart. Earlier this month, at a constituent conversation in Bristol, Pennsylvania, I watched eight Americans with very different political views offer a glimpse of how it does not have to stay that way.

Four “Reds” and four “Blues” — terms used for participants on the political right and left — sat across from Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), the Republican and Democratic co-chairs of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, to present something increasingly unusual in our politics: unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration developed through an earlier Common Ground Workshop.

Keep ReadingShow less