Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan Renews Accusations Against Mary Peltola as Ballot Controversy Intensifies

New allegations after casting his ballot

Republican Senator Dan Sullivan renewed his attacks on Democratic challenger Mary Peltola after voting in Alaska’s November 3 election. He described the appearance of another candidate named Dan J. Sullivan on the ballot as one of the biggest election-cheating scandals in the state’s history. The incumbent argued that voters could confuse the two candidates and mistakenly cast ballots against him. He also raised a rumor that money had been paid to persuade a former campaign manager to drop a lawsuit and retract her account. Sullivan said he did not know whether that payment allegation was true. No available reporting has established that such a payment occurred.

The dispute centers on two candidates with similar names

The controversy involves incumbent Senator Dan S. Sullivan and Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired teacher from Petersburg in southeast Alaska. On October 28, The New York Times published an investigation reporting that people associated with Peltola’s campaign had discussed recruiting other candidates with names similar to the Republican incumbent. The newspaper cited text messages, documents and interviews, including interviews with Peltola’s former campaign manager Elisa Rios. Rios later sought to retract some of her statements, but The New York Times said its reporting was supported by multiple sources and documentary material. The dispute became a major issue in the final days of a Senate race that could affect control of the chamber.

Denials and the limits of what has been established

Peltola and her campaign denied involvement in recruiting the second Sullivan. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, or DSCC, also said it had not participated. Daniel J. Sullivan has repeatedly denied being recruited by Democrats and said he had no contact with Peltola’s campaign. Senator Sullivan’s campaign argues that text messages and campaign-finance records point to Democratic involvement in the effort. Alaska Public Media said it had not independently verified all of The New York Times’ reporting. The existence of reported messages and allegations does not establish that Peltola personally knew about or participated in any unlawful activity. The distinction is important because the public accusations have gone further than the findings announced by law enforcement.

State and federal investigations continue

Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy ordered an investigation into whether the alleged conduct violated state law. The U.S. Department of Justice has also investigated whether people attempted to use the similarly named candidate to influence the election. The department previously filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent Alaska from certifying the result if Peltola won. A federal judge dismissed that lawsuit on Sunday, and the Trump administration said it would appeal. The Associated Press reported that investigators were examining possible election violations, but no campaign official had been criminally charged in connection with the controversy at the time of the relevant reports. The legal proceedings therefore remain separate from the candidates’ political claims about what happened.

Ranked-choice voting complicates the outcome

Alaska uses ranked-choice voting, allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than half of the first-choice votes, the state proceeds to additional rounds of tabulation. Alaska Public Media reported on election night that Peltola held an early lead, but only a small portion of precincts had reported at that point and mailed ballots were still being accepted. If no candidate crosses the required threshold, further tabulation is scheduled for November 18. An early lead is not a final result. Nor does it establish that the presence of the second Sullivan changed the outcome. The final effect, if any, will depend on the full count and the ranked-choice process.

Political accusations are not legal findings

Sullivan has called the ballot controversy election cheating, and Trump has previously called for Peltola to be prosecuted. Those statements are political accusations, not findings that a crime occurred. FactCheck.org and PolitiFact have reviewed the legal history and explain that the dispute involves separate questions about candidate eligibility, campaign recruitment and certification of election results. The Alaska Supreme Court previously allowed Daniel J. Sullivan to remain a candidate. The federal lawsuit sought to restrict certification if the incumbent lost under certain vote conditions. The next developments to watch are whether investigators present specific evidence, how the courts handle the administration’s appeal and how Alaska completes the ranked-choice count.