Alaska Senate Race Roiled by Ballot-Recruitment Allegations
publishers 17articles 24first reported 23 Oct, 23:16 UTCdeveloping since 25 Oct · 7 editions
Alaska’s closely watched U.S. Senate race has been shaken by allegations that Democratic operatives sought to recruit candidates who could draw votes from Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan, as he faces former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola in the Nov. 3 election.
The New York Times reported that Peltola campaign staff and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee aides explored recruiting other candidates, including Alaskans named Dan Sullivan, as part of a “ballot composition project.” The newspaper cited interviews, messages and documents. A former Peltola campaign manager initially said Peltola knew about the effort but did not participate directly, then sought to retract her statements. Peltola’s campaign and the DSCC denied recruiting candidates.
Dan J. Sullivan Jr., a retired educator with no party designation, appears on the ranked-choice ballot alongside Sen. Sullivan, who is identified as the Republican incumbent. Sullivan Jr. has said he entered the race independently. Recruiting potential spoiler candidates is not itself illegal.
Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy directed Alaska’s Department of Public Safety to investigate whether any laws were violated. President Donald Trump called for Peltola’s removal from the ballot and said his administration should seek to block certification if the incumbent loses; the administration has filed a lawsuit citing possible voter confusion.
Beyond the controversy, Sullivan and Peltola are competing for Alaska Native support. Fishing policy is a major issue, particularly declining salmon runs and industrial trawler bycatch. Peltola supports banning factory trawlers, while Sullivan is promoting legislation intended to reduce bycatch and protect habitat.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 5 with the publisher's own text; 7 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 108 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 17
- Source articles
- 24
- Given to the writer
- 8, 5 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 7
- This version written
- 108 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →