When Alaska’s $500 cap on contributions to political candidates was overturned by a judge in 2021, wealthy donors became an even more vital part of the state’s political landscape, where their five- or six-figure checks quickly outpaced the ability of the average Alaskan to impact any given race.
The fallout is particularly clear in the race for the next governor, where leading candidates have turned to wealthy backers—or their own deep pockets—for a majority of their cash.
Voters will get a chance to change that with Ballot Measure 1 on the Aug. 18 primary election ballot, which would set a $2,000 limit on how much any US resident can give to a candidate during an election cycle. The limit would only affect a tiny fraction of donors who contribute to candidates, according to The Alaska Current’s analysis of recent fundraising reports.
Still, it would have a massive impact on the amount of money in the race.
We broke down the fundraising numbers by contributions that would be above that $2,000 limit and those that would be legal under the limit. We also separated all the money candidates gave to themselves—like Republican candidate Matt Heilala’s nearly $1.5 million in checks to his own campaign for governor—because that won’t be affected by the initiative. The First Amendment bars any limits on how much candidates can give to their own campaigns.
According to that breakdown, just 3% of donors in this election cycle would violate the initiative’s $2,000 limit. Yet, they’re responsible for more than half of the money raised by candidates for state office: About $4.8 million of the $9.1 million raised, or 53%.
Meanwhile, the remaining roughly 20,000 donors would fall under the $2,000 limit. They make up about 97% of all donors, but account for just 47% of the money flowing to campaigns.
While the size of the contributions varies from a few cents to a few hundred thousand dollars, the average big-ticket contribution is about $8,300, while those falling within the proposed limit average about $220.
And pretty much every candidate, regardless of party affiliation, is banking on those deep-pocketed donors for a majority of their funding.
Former Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor, a Republican who has been campaigning on a platform of barring trans kids from sports, relies the most on big-dollar contributions of any gubernatorial candidate, with 86% of his roughly $724,000 in fundraising coming from contributions above the $2,000 limit.
The same goes for all but one of the leading Republican candidates for governor. Former Revenue Commissioner Adam Crum raised $550,000, with 71% coming from funders giving over $2,000; former state Sen. Shelley Hughes’ campaign got about 57% of its $200,000 from large dollar contributions; and former Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson got 5% of his $360,000 from these kinds of contributions.
The lone leading Republican to rely more on smaller-dollar contributions is Bernadette Wilson. Wilson raised about $700,000, with only 46% coming from contributions of over $2,000 or more.
On the Democratic side of the ballot, both Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins and Tom Begich have many big-dollar donors in their corners. Kreiss-Tomkins raised $1.8 million, but 72% came from contributions of over $2,000. Begich, meanwhile, can credit 63% of his $1.2 million to big contributions.
The money, as well as the revelations of where it came from, has been a particularly big issue for Kreiss-Tomkins, whose big-ticket contributors mostly work for AI company Anthropic. While both he and these donors argue that they favor stringent regulations on AI usage in Alaska, it’s become a lingering issue for him, particularly as he tries to court progressive and moderate voters.
But in a recent interview, he also conceded that relying on wealthier donors is a reality of the state’s current political landscape.
“We’re in this super sucky campaign finance landscape — which I hate, and have worked as a legislator to prevent — which is, like, unlimited money,” he told the Northern Journal. “It’s just this arms race, and as a friend of mine said, you can’t bring a butter knife to a bazooka fight.”
And while money doesn’t mean everything, it certainly makes a difference. Not only does it buy ads, signs, and campaign staff, but it’s also a critical signal of a campaign’s strength and support, opening the door to more backers and support.
On the congressional side of things, money was one of the biggest reasons Rev. Matt Schultz dropped out of the race. With the big players lining up behind independent candidate Bill Hill, Schultz told the Alaska Beacon it just didn’t make sense for him to continue if the goal was to unseat incumbent Republican US Rep. Nick Begich III.
“One of the most disturbing things about the election process is how much … is determined by money, and I did not have a viable financial path forward,” he said. “If I had made it through the primary, which — I think there’s a real good chance I would have been the frontrunner — but I would not have had the financial war chest required to take on Nick Begich.”
For Kreiss-Tomkins’ part, that’s why he says he’s supporting Ballot Measure 1.
“It sucks. Fortunately, I think it’s going to get fixed in the primary election, with a ballot initiative,” he said to the Northern Journal. “But here we are in this election cycle, and it’s not fixed yet. So, yeah: You can’t bring a butter knife to a bazooka fight.”
Matt Acuña Buxton is a long-time political reporter who has written for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and The Midnight Sun political blog. He also authors the daily politics newsletter, The Alaska Memo, and can frequently be found live-tweeting public meetings on Bluesky.
