New reporting and additional evidence raise questions about tactics used to promote internet voting laws

ANCHORAGE, AK — Anchorage election officials have pushed back against what they describe as “false and misleading” claims about the city’s use of mobile voting technology, escalating concerns about a broader national campaign to expand internet voting systems.

In a recent report by the Anchorage Daily News, municipal officials confirmed they issued a cease-and-desist letter to the Mobile Voting Project and its founder, Bradley Tusk, after the group repeatedly and falsely claimed Anchorage would implement Tusk’s technology in its election system. 

The letter stated that Mobile Voting Project and Tusk’s public statements, “convey a clear message that the Municipality of Anchorage not only endorses the Mobile Voting Project but uses your VoteSecure software to conduct its elections. This is unequivocally false.”

The controversy stems in part from a high-profile New York Times article that portrayed Anchorage as a leading example of mobile voting adoption, and that claimed that Anchorage would employ software developed by the Mobile Voting Project. Local officials quickly disputed that characterization, clarifying that only a small number of voters use a limited electronic ballot return system.

Additional reporting and source materials indicate that the Anchorage incident may be part of a broader, aggressive effort to advance internet voting legislation nationwide.

According to materials obtained by advocates and journalists:

• Tusk has promoted claims that Anchorage would use his mobile voting technology, despite local officials publicly rejecting that assertion
• The Mobile Voting Project continued to repeat those claims even after being corrected, prompting formal legal action from the municipality
• Tusk has backed legislative efforts across multiple states to expand internet voting, despite widespread opposition from cybersecurity experts

Cybersecurity experts have long warned that internet voting introduces significant risks that cannot currently be mitigated, particularly in public elections.

“Tusk and Mobile Voting Project are aggressively promoting legislation in state houses all across the country that would introduce and expand the use of insecure and untrustworthy online voting, with specious and misleading claims,” said Susan Greenhalgh, senior advisor for election security at Free Speech For People. “The instance in Anchorage just illustrates their willingness to stretch the truth in order to advance Tusk’s personal pet project, despite the dangers it presents to our elections.” 

The Anchorage dispute highlights a broader national debate over the future of voting technology and the risks of misinformation in election administration.

As legislative efforts to expand mobile voting continue across the country, advocates and election officials alike are calling for greater scrutiny of the claims used to promote such systems.