Alaskans Voted Against Big Money in Politics. Instead They Got More.

Major donors have surged into Alaska's gubernatorial campaign for the second time in 50 years.

Words, photos, and visuals by Will Koeppen

Mike Dunleavy speaks at an event in Anchorage, Alaska in 2022.

In 2021, Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy directed lawyers for the State of Alaska to stop defending a voter-approved cap on individual campaign contributions. That action set off a financial frenzy, as wealthy donors from across the U.S. poured money into the 2022 gubernatorial race, including Dunleavy's own re-election campaign. Five years later, multiple efforts to reinstate contribution limits have been blocked or delayed, and Alaska still doesn't limit how much money an individual can give directly to a candidate for state office.

November 2026 will bring the second gubernatorial election in over 50 years in which Alaskan voters will wade through campaign ads fueled by unlimited individual donations. Treg Taylor, Governor Dunleavy's former Attorney General who led his Department of Law, is now a candidate himself. Early financial disclosures show that out of all the candidates, he is taking the most advantage of large individual donors. But he's not the only one, and that's not the only story.

The following graphic shows categorized income for the nine candidates who raised more than $20,000 by February 1, 2026. Note that four candidates (Nancy Dahlstrom, Edna DeVries, Bruce Waldon, and James William Parkin IV) raised less than $20,000; and five candidates (Hank Kroll, Jessica Faircloth, Meda DeWitt, Gregg Brelsford, and Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins) declared their candidacy after the disclosure period. Kreiss-Tomkins, in particular, has announced raising $750,000 in his first two weeks of fund-raising. The next round of financial disclosures are due on July 20, 2026, one month before the primary election.

Alaskans Don't Like Money in Politics

For much of the past five decades, Alaskans have voted to keep money out of state politics. After the Watergate scandal in 1972, the federal government and the states developed legislation to regulate how money could be given to candidates running for public office. The Alaska legislature followed suit in 1974, limiting contributions given from individuals to candidates to $1000 per year ($6,700 in today's money).

That limit would last more than 20 years, until 1996, when a pending ballot initiative pressured the Alaska legislature to pre-emptively lower the limit to just $500 per year. (In today's value, the equivalent would be going from $2,100 to $1,050.) Lawmakers raised the limit to $1,000 in 2003, but voters rebuked them just three years later with another ballot initiative that reinstated the $500 individual limit once more.

In fact, the 2006 initiative went even further. It capped direct donations to candidates from political parties and groups, placed limits on individual contributions to political groups, and restricted candidates from accepting more than $3,000 per year from all nonresidents combined. The measure passed with 73% of the vote.

But trouble with the limits brewed, especially from within the Alaska Republican Party.

A Legal Challenge

In 2015, two prominent Alaskan Republicans, a non-resident family member of a Republican House member, and District 18 of the Alaska Republican Party filed a lawsuit challenging the core provisions of Alaska’s campaign finance laws set up by the 2006 ballot initiative. The landmark case Citizens United v. FEC had changed the landscape for campaign finance restrictions, and in a 2018 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down both the nonresident and individual-to-group limits. But the other limits were upheld, including those capping individual contributions. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court and was then remanded back to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to compare it to a similar case brought in Vermont.

Upon re-evaluation in 2021, the three-judge court of appeals was split. Two justices in the majority wrote that the $500 limit was so low that challengers would be unable to compete effectively against incumbents. They noted that the law didn't include increases due to inflation and that Alaskan candidates, even with the VECO scandal in its relatively recent history, were not so corrupt as to require a lower-than-usual limit.

But the chief judge dissented, saying he would have upheld all of the original limits that were approved by voters. His strong disagreement was considered an invitation for Alaska to ask for another form of appeal called an en banc review — if Alaska wanted to keep its $500 individual contribution limit, it could ask all nine members of the appeals court to hear their case.

Instead, Governor Dunleavy directed his Department of Law, led by then-Attorney General Treg Taylor to pursue the case no further.

Staff at the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC), which oversees campaign finance in the state, quickly suggested that APOC commissioners vote on a new contribution limit of $1,500 per year. But two commissioners who were appointed by Dunleavy voted against the new limits and scuttled the effort. A legislative bill passed the House but failed to come to a vote in the Republican-controlled Senate.

The 2022 gubernatorial election, including Dunleavy's campaign for re-election, was open for business.

A Flood of Money

Citizens United was decided in 2010, paving the way for political groups called super PACs, which can collect and spend unlimited amounts to support candidates as long as they don't coordinate with them. “Dunleavy for Alaska” was one such group, and it collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from Dunleavy supporters, including Governor Dunleavy's younger brother Francis.

Francis Dunleavy, who resides in Houston, Texas, was accused of “manipulative bidding” on power markets while leading a division at JPMorgan Chase & Co. According to the settlement, no laws were broken, but Francis Dunleavy's retirement coincided with JPMorgan paying out $410 million to settle the allegations.

When Mike Dunleavy first ran for governor in 2018, Francis could legally only give his brother's campaign $500 per year. He gave nearly half-a-million dollars to “Dunleavy for Alaska” instead. After Governor Dunleavy's directive that Alaska abandon its defense of contribution limits, Francis was able to send $300,000 directly to his brother's re-election campaign.

Both Governor Dunleavy and his main opponent, Bill Walker, drew in large donations in 2022, effectively doubling the overall size of each man's campaign. In fact, they both raised nearly the same amount of additional money — $1.34 million above the amount that they could have raised if the $500 limit had remained in place.

If it had been sent back to voters, the period of unlimited political contributions might have been an electoral fluke. But proponents of a ballot initiative got a late start on collecting signatures and failed to get it on the 2024 ballot. And there was still no appetite for campaign finance reform among Republican state senators, who stalled a pending house bill that was put forward in early 2025.

Treg Taylor resigned from his post as Alaska's Attorney General in August, 2025. He announced his own candidacy for Governor one month later.

The Final Free-for-All?

The 2026 August primary election may include as many as 18 candidates for governor in a ranked choice open primary. The top four candidates will move on to the general election in November.

The November election will also ask Alaskans to vote on three ballot initiatives related to elections. One is a symbolic change of wording related to U.S. citizens and voting; another aims to repeal its ranked choice system, open primaries, and “true source” campaign disclosure requirements. The third will ask voters, once again, how much money they want in local and state politics.

If history holds, this may be Alaska's last election cycle without individual giving limits. At least for a while.