A New York Times investigation identified political strategist Jerid Kurtz as a central figure in an alleged effort involving Democratic campaign officials to recruit candidates who could divert votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska’s closely contested election.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
A veteran Democratic political operative has been identified as a key intermediary in an alleged effort to recruit a candidate sharing the name of Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska’s U.S. Senate race, according to an investigation published Wednesday, Oct. 28, by The New York Times.
Jerid Kurtz, an Ohio-based political strategist, allegedly worked with individuals connected to Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola’s campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) to identify potential candidates who could draw votes away from the Republican incumbent in Tuesday’s election.
The New York Times investigation identified Kurtz through interviews with former Peltola campaign manager Elisa Rios, other individuals familiar with the operation and internal communications documenting discussions among Democratic campaign personnel.
Rios said the effort began during the summer of 2025, when Democratic strategists explored ways to place additional candidates on Alaska’s four-person general election ballot. The objective, according to her account, was to recruit candidates who could complicate the incumbent Republican senator’s reelection campaign.
During an early planning meeting, DSCC staff introduced Kurtz to Rios and Anton McParland, who was then serving as Peltola’s chief of staff. Kurtz was presented as an experienced political operative specializing in discreet candidate recruitment and ballot-related campaign tactics.
By early 2026, Kurtz had reportedly identified Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher living in Petersburg, Alaska, who shared the incumbent senator’s first and last names.
Rios told the Times that Kurtz discussed his contact with the prospective candidate during a video conference with members of the campaign’s ballot-planning team.
Kurtz “told us when he found him,” Rios said.
According to Rios, Kurtz described the prospective candidate as someone who opposed President Donald Trump and was sympathetic to Peltola’s campaign.
He said Sullivan “said he hated Trump, and if it was going to help Mary, he liked Mary. He didn’t have any interest in being a politician, but if this could help.”
Daniel J. Sullivan subsequently entered the Senate race, initially registering as a Republican before changing his political affiliation to undeclared. His presence on the ballot raised concerns among Republicans that voters could confuse him with the incumbent senator.
The retired teacher has maintained that he independently decided to run and was not recruited by Democratic political operatives.
The Times’ investigation also examined communications suggesting that senior Democratic campaign personnel tracked the effort over several months.
McParland reportedly requested updates concerning an individual described in messages as “Jarid,” “Jared” or “our friend,” with DSCC personnel helping arrange additional discussions.
In one January exchange, McParland expressed concern that the operative’s activities had attracted attention.
“I am hearing that our friend in the state is being noticed,” McParland wrote.
Andrew Piatt, the DSCC’s director of campaigns, responded, “We will check in.”
The investigation found that Kurtz reportedly used pseudonyms and cover stories while contacting potential candidates. In late May, shortly before Daniel J. Sullivan filed his candidacy paperwork, Kurtz told a Peltola campaign aide that he had arrived in Petersburg, according to Rios and another person familiar with the conversation.
Federal Election Commission records also showed that 49th State PAC, a super PAC supporting Peltola, paid approximately $87,000 to Wingspan Strategies, a consulting company co-owned by Kurtz, during the fall campaign.
The political action committee denied employing Kurtz for the alleged recruitment activity, stating that it had “never hired or paid Jerid Kurtz for performing any services.”
Kurtz did not respond to requests for comment from the Times. His LinkedIn profile was subsequently removed from public view, and his X account was made private.
The allegations have triggered investigations by state and federal authorities. On Thursday, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy directed the state’s Department of Public Safety to examine whether the candidate-recruitment operation violated election laws.
The Associated Press reported on the state investigation as concerns intensified over potential voter confusion in the closely contested Senate race.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., also announced a congressional investigation, requesting testimony from Rios and Kurtz concerning their alleged involvement.
Comer requested that Rios appear for an interview Nov. 5 and Kurtz on Nov. 6, warning that subpoenas could be issued if they failed to cooperate voluntarily.
The Justice Department has separately pursued litigation concerning the election, seeking intervention over the potential effect of the similarly named candidate on the final result.
Both the Peltola campaign and the DSCC have denied participating in the recruitment scheme. Rios, who was dismissed from her campaign position in August, told the Times that Peltola was aware of discussions about recruiting additional candidates but was not personally involved in directing the operation.
Peltola has described the allegations as a political distraction in the closing days of the campaign.
The controversy is particularly significant because Alaska uses a nonpartisan primary system in which the four candidates receiving the most votes advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation.
The state’s ranked-choice voting system allows voters to rank those candidates by preference. If no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the lowest-performing candidate is eliminated and those ballots are redistributed according to voters’ subsequent preferences.
Daniel J. Sullivan qualified for the general election ballot under that system. Alaska election officials initially removed him from the primary ballot, but the Alaska Supreme Court ordered his reinstatement, finding that candidates were not required to demonstrate political sincerity as a condition of ballot access.
The Times also reported that Democratic strategists considered establishing a new political party intended to attract conservative voters.
In January, McParland suggested the idea in communications with DSCC personnel.
“Imagine if there was a MAGA party!” he wrote.
“Smart,” Piatt responded. “Let’s see.”
The proposal involved discussions with attorneys from Elias Law Group, which represented Democratic campaign organizations, but the effort was abandoned in May.
The controversy has also renewed attention to similar political tactics used by Republicans. During Peltola’s 2024 House reelection campaign, the Alaska Republican Party supported efforts to keep another Democratic candidate on the ballot, despite that candidate being incarcerated in New York.
Recruiting additional candidates or supporting their ballot access is not automatically illegal. Whether the reported activities violated election laws would depend on evidence of unlawful coordination, fraudulent filings, false statements or other prohibited conduct.
The investigation has nevertheless raised questions about the extent to which campaign officials coordinated behind-the-scenes efforts to influence the composition of Alaska’s Senate ballot.
With the Nov. 3 election approaching, the allegations have become another source of controversy in the contest between Sullivan and Peltola, while state investigators, federal prosecutors and congressional officials examine the circumstances surrounding Daniel J. Sullivan’s candidacy.
Original article
Comments