Growing up in a community-oriented family in Soldotna, I have been on both sides of the political spectrum. My father, a Navy veteran, and my mother, a pioneer of her time, both worked in the public service and lived on a farm in Soldotna. Politics was always a topic of discussion at our kitchen table. Whether it was the local assembly, the school board, or larger governmental issues, our home was a center for debate and civic engagement. These discussions shaped my worldview and led me to where I am today – a moderate Republican who supports open primaries and ranked-choice voting.

Why? Because I have seen firsthand the games that are played when the parties are in control. Before open primaries, it was common for Democrats to temporarily switch their registration to participate in Republican primaries and vice versa, hoping to have a weaker opponent in the general election. This type of deception compromised the integrity of the process and often left voters with decisions that did not truly reflect their interests. You can't run a democracy like that.

Open primaries and ranked-choice voting have completely changed the game, allowing voters to focus on the candidates and what they really bring to the table, rather than the letter next to their name.

Critics of open primaries and ranked-choice voting say this system can be confusing for voters or that it weakens the party's influence. But I would argue that the benefits far outweigh these concerns. The process gives voters the opportunity to become more engaged and informed. This is not a disadvantage – it is the way democracy should work. Open primaries give voters more power to select candidates who reflect their values, and ranked-choice voting allows them to choose their top candidate without fear of “wasting” a vote on an ideological candidate.

Some also say ranked-choice voting could lead to more moderate candidates, and they argue that it is not representative of the wishes of some party factions. But consider this: Do we do better when our elected leaders can work together, or when they are pressured to conform to extremes?

As a lifelong Alaskan, I have seen how partisan loyalty can interfere with what is best for our communities. I was raised to believe that if you don't participate in the process, you don't have a voice. My parents were active locally – whether it was bringing a hospital to our town or helping to found the borough and school district, they were always involved in community service. This is the key: Politics should be about community service, not party loyalty.

I switched my party affiliation to Republican after becoming increasingly frustrated with the backroom decisions I witnessed as a Democrat. Although I have seen some of the same struggles in the Republican Party, I have stayed because I believe in the conservative values ​​of limited government and personal responsibility. However, I also believe in the need for transparency, inclusivity and governance that serves the people – not just the party. Open primaries and ranked-choice voting offer a way to put power back in the hands of the voters, where it belongs. That's why I will vote no on Ballot Measure 2.

Linda Hutchings is a second-generation Alaskan, business owner and proud grandmother.