Aides, including a hired gun, working for Alaska Senate Democrat Mary Peltola may not have committed a crime, but they did seem to have stepped on that third rail of elections – Deception.
The question is whether a late-breaking New York Times report that campaign aides indeed had worked for months behind the scenes to recruit a second “Dan Sullivan” for the ballot on which voters will rule tomorrow will affect the results in a close race that could affect the party majority in the Senate. Early voting is under way already, of course, under the state’s “ranked” voting law, in which voters can choose more than one name in any order they want.
The Second Dan Sullivan and Alaska’s Senate Ballot Controversy
Until yesterday, the public story had focused on a lawsuit even before the election by the Donald Trump Justice Department. The lawsuit wanted to halt any potential certification of Peltola as a possible winner against incumbent Republican Dan Sullivan – exactly because some Sullivan votes might be siphoned off to a second Dan (different initial) Sullivan, a rural fisherman.
Legal experts had weighed in that the federal case was weak, both because the federal government lacks jurisdiction over the state-run election and because the Alaska Supreme Court already had reviewed the two-Sullivan ballot listing and had blessed it. The Peltola campaign has asked the court to act quickly to throw out the federal lawsuit.
If anything, the Alaska case was another in a series of Team Trump moves described as “desperate” measures to retain a Republican majority in the Senate.
Alaska’s Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy announced the state would investigate the effort as a possible crime or civil violation of law.
Political Deception and the Fight for Senate Control
Whatever the voting results, and whatever the outcome of the federal lawsuit, the disclosures this close to a race that appears from polls to be a statistical tie guarantees that the non-legal, political fighting over whether to seat the winner of the Alaska election will continue for weeks and into January, when the new Congress takes over.
Depending on a half-dozen other Senate race outcomes, it could be the Alaska vote that settles whether there will be a Republican or Democratic majority in the Senate.
For Peltola, an apparently popular former congress woman who has built her campaign on issues of trust and pressed on local issues as well as high prices, the report will come as a blow. Since most minds likely are already made up in Alaska days before the election, it is unclear whether these findings will affect either turnout or vote.
Generally, incumbent Sullivan has presented himself as a strong voice for Trump policies, including for the war in Iran, tariffs and tax cuts. Generally, Peltola, who was the first Alaskan native person in Congress, talks faith, fish and high prices – and general opposition to Trump. The other Dan Sullivan says nothing.
Incumbent Sullivan and Republicans leaped at the news – for once Trump wasn’t trashing reporters — to cry foul. Peltola’s campaign said basically that it was unaware of any efforts to recruit a second Dan Sullivan.
What Did Mary Peltola’s Campaign Know?
The Times report included statements from a dozen people familiar with or said to be participating in the recruitment effort, including a wobbly statement and then retraction by the former Peltola campaign manager acknowledging the recruitment effort. The report also cited email and various documents to lend credence or raise questions over a shadowy, secret effort to find someone who might help sow voter confusion for the incumbent.
Peltola, who kept her distance from the recruitment, was reported by those sources to be “aware” of it.
The cynics among us would note that the nature of our politics – regardless of party — puts winning ahead of behaviors that we would all regard as ethical. It seems egregious that we will face critical questions about the direction of our government as the political squirming and in-fighting in Washington focuses on a single Senate seat.
Alaska Senate Race Controversy: Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Why are there two candidates named Dan Sullivan on Alaska’s Senate ballot?
A: Reports indicate that political operatives sought to recruit a second candidate named Dan Sullivan to run in Alaska’s Senate election. The controversy centers on whether the shared name could confuse voters and affect support for incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.
Q: What is Mary Peltola’s connection to the second Dan Sullivan?
A: The New York Times reported that individuals associated with Peltola’s campaign participated in efforts to recruit another candidate named Dan Sullivan. Peltola’s campaign has said it was unaware of those efforts, while sources cited in the report claimed she knew about the recruitment.
Q: How does ranked-choice voting work in Alaska?
A: Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the lowest-performing candidate is eliminated and eligible votes are redistributed according to voters’ next preferences until a candidate achieves a majority.
Q: Could Alaska’s Senate election determine which party controls the Senate?
A: Yes. Depending on the outcomes of other closely contested Senate races, Alaska’s election could play a decisive role in determining whether Republicans or Democrats control the U.S. Senate.
“FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS NOT JUST IMPORTANT TO DEMOCRACY, IT IS DEMOCRACY.” – Walter Cronkite. CLICK HERE to donate in support of our free and independent voice.
