Today was Primary Election Day in Alaska. It was the first time that an Alaskan election was held using the progressive ranked-choice voting (RCV) for state and federal general elections. Alaskans were promised in November 2020, that the RCV method would give us “more choice and more voice.”
I did not vote for RCV because it sounded
like a bad way to run an election. I like the “one person, one vote” model. My
experience with the RCV ballot found it confusing, and I would gladly vote to
do away with it. It seems to me that it gives less choice and less voice even
as it claims to give more of each. My question is, “Did Lisa Murkowski work to
change Alaska’s voting system to get her re-elected?”
Recently, Project Veritas Action released
a new video about the RCV method. From the information in the video, it appears
that Senator Lisa Murkowski was somehow behind the passing of the RCV method in
Alaska. The video exposes two Murkowski paid staff members discussing the
passing of the RCV method. The following information from the video comes from
Project Veritas.
In the video, Josiah Nash, who works as
the campaign’s Interior Coordinator, is recorded admitting that while Sen.
Murkowski was publicly neutral, she secretly supported the implementation of a
ranked voting system in Alaska because that is her route to victory.
“She stayed quiet and honestly it was
probably best she stayed quiet on that,” Nash said, adding that “she supports
it, yeah.”
“You’re not going to see the campaign come
out and necessarily support progressive things. I mean, behind closed doors we’ll
have talks…” Nash continued. “We’re being strategic with our messaging. Walking
a fine line, I guess is what I’m saying, to try to get her elected,” he said.
Nash suggests Measure 2 was not honestly
presented to Alaskans and helps progressive candidates.
“They framed it [Ballot Measure 2]
basically, you know, ‘This gives you more choice’ -- ‘This makes it so we have
better candidates.’ And I think it helps progressive candidates… If it was
[called] a progressive measure, it wouldn’t really work,” he said.
Another paid Murkowski campaign official,
Emma Ashlock, echoed Nash’s comments; admitting on camera that Ballot Measure 2
secretly benefited Sen. Murkowski and that several people who currently work in
the Murkowski campaign were previously involved in passing Ballot Measure 2. One
of those people is Shea Siegert, Murkowski’s Comms Director.
“I know a lot of people who were working
on Ballot Measure 2. I don’t think Shea has ever worked for Senator Murkowski
[before], but I know a lot of other people who worked on that have worked for
Senator Murkowski,” she said.
“I know a lot of people who were working
on Ballot Measure 2. I don’t think Shea has ever worked for Senator Murkowski
[before], but I know a lot of other people who worked on that have worked for
Senator Murkowski,” she said.
“While we were working on Ballot Measure 2
and voting for Ballot Measure 2, we had Senator Murkowski in mind the whole
time,” Ashlock said.
Nash echoed a similar sentiment, “Between
you and me, Ballot Measure 2 [Ranked Voting System] was actually created – I think
it was created for two reasons. Number one, it was created because there were
people in this state who wanted to see a better system, but they also wanted
Lisa [Murkowski] to get re-elected.”
Did Murkowski and/or her campaign
staff betray Alaskans by promoting ranked-choice voting? Long-time Alaskans
know that Murkowski became a Senator in the first place because she was
appointed to the seat by her father, Frank Murkowski, when he left the Senate
and became Governor of Alaska.
It is totally possible that Murkowski would lose a Primary election if there were separate Republican and Democrat ballots because she is not well-liked by Republicans in Alaska. Republicans do not like the way that she votes with the Democrats much of the time. Even though Republicans do not like her, she is well-supported by Democrats. The progressive ranked-choice voting system is just what left-leaning Murkowski needs to be re-elected in a conservative state.
No comments:
Post a Comment