Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
04/15/2017 10:00 AM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB13 | |
| HB200 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 200 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 200-NONPARTISAN OPEN PRIMARY ELECTIONS
5:59:56 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 200, "An Act establishing a top two nonpartisan
open primary election system for elective state executive and
state and national legislative offices; repealing the special
runoff election for the office of United States senator or
United States representative; changing appointment procedures
relating to precinct watchers and members of precinct election
boards, election district absentee and questioned ballot
counting boards, and the Alaska Public Offices Commission;
requiring certain written notices to appear in election
pamphlets and polling places; relating to declarations of
candidacy and letters of intent; and amending the definition of
'political party.'"
6:00:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX moved to adopt Amendment 1, Version 30-
LS0038\U.1, Bullard, 4/12/17, which read as follows:
Page 2, following line 27:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 3. AS 15.07.060(b) is amended to read:
(b) Every registration form must include space
for an applicant who is registered in another
jurisdiction to specify that jurisdiction and a notice
that the director will notify the chief elections
officer in that jurisdiction. If the applicant has
been previously registered to vote in another
jurisdiction, the director shall notify the chief
elections officer in that jurisdiction that the
applicant has registered to vote in Alaska and request
that that jurisdiction cancel the applicant's voter
registration there."
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER objected.
6:00:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX explained that Amendment 1 clarifies the
process in the event candidate two died, was incapacitated,
decided to get out of the race, and so forth, the amendment
advances candidate three to the number two position.
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP described Amendment 1 as fairly exhaustive,
involving a number of policy calls and he would like a full
analysis.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX answered that the bottom line is Amendment
1 simply moves the candidate in third place to the second place
position.
6:01:51 PM
COURTNEY ENRIGHT, Staff, Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Alaska
State Legislature, noted there is a lot of conforming language
within Amendment 1, although, a couple of pieces do create a bit
more intricacy. The amendment provides that in the event of a
tie, for example, if two candidates had advanced that had tied
in the first position, the person who came in second "instead of
strictly third" would advance, and it takes into account that
particular instance of occurrence. The amendment also speaks to
current statute which states that if the state was 64 days out
from the general election, the third candidate would not
advance, which is also in compliance with federal voting laws.
This relates to the requirement to have ballots prepared and
forwarded to overseas troops, and others, 45 days prior to an
election, and that deadline is in existing statute. Those, she
said, are the biggest complications in the amendment.
6:02:53 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN, in response to Representative Kopp, advised that
his office received Amendment 1 yesterday, and it was
distributed to the committee last night.
6:03:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that under the state's current
partisan primary system, for example, there is an interested
party to nominate or replace if someone resigns or whatever, and
that is not included in this proposal. He pointed out that he
was concerned that its absence may militate in the direction of
creating a new or greater incentive for coercing someone or
convincing someone to withdraw knowing that another party
candidate might be the replacement.
6:04:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER pointed out that the amendment speaks
only of the third person moving up into second place, and he
could think of several scenarios where possibly that would not
be the appropriate avenue. For instance, he remarked, the third
person had moved on with their life and decided not to be part
of the election, there was not a mechanism to move down to the
fourth candidate. He asked what happens if two people drop off
the ticket with no mechanism to move to lower positions.
6:05:12 PM
MS. ENRIGHT agreed that there is no mechanism to move down
through the other positions because the amendment stays
consistent with other systems. She explained that those other
systems do not allow anyone to advance from the third position
to the second position in the general election, and they have
managed to successfully implement their systems for many years.
Ironically, she explained, the reason the other systems do not
allow candidates to advance from third to second position if
there is an incapacitated instance, are the same reasons
Representative Eastman expressed concern about not having an
individual advancing from second to third. The other systems,
she explained, believe there is a greater incentive for
coercion. For example, when speaking with the group that ran
the California ballot initiative, it advised that it had
specifically not included that caveat because it was believed
that in continuing to move down the line, political pressure
could be provided to get individuals to withdraw their
candidacy. She confirmed that Amendment 1 does not provide a
mechanism to continue moving down the ballot past the third
candidate.
6:06:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER asked whether the main bill or this
amendment speaks to a situation where there is a tie or second
and third place tie.
MS. ENRIGHT explained that it would be addressed in the same
manner as any other tie vote would be addressed under Alaska
State Statute, "through a lot or a coin toss."
6:07:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER withdrew his objection.
6:07:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD objected.
6:07:22 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Kreiss-Tomkins,
LeDoux, Fansler, Eastman, and Claman voted in favor of the
adoption of Amendment 1. Representatives Kopp and Reinbold
voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote
of 5-2.
6:07:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 2, Version 30-
LS0038\U.2, Bullard, 4/14/17, which read as follows:
Page 1, line 1, following "nonpartisan":
Insert "ranked-choice"
Page 6, line 9, following "nonpartisan":
Insert "ranked-choice"
Page 7, following line 12:
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(16) The director shall design the primary
or special primary election ballot to accommodate
ranked-choice voting for candidates for the offices of
governor and lieutenant governor, for candidates for
the legislature, and for candidates for the United
States Congress. The ballot shall direct the voter to
mark candidates in order of preference and to mark as
many choices as the voter wishes, but not to assign a
particular ranking to more than one candidate in the
same race."
Page 7, following line 20:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 12. AS 15.15.350 is amended by adding new
subsections to read:
(c) When counting primary or special primary
election ranked-choice voting ballots, the election
board shall initially count each ballot as one vote
for the highest-ranked continuing candidate on the
ballot or as an exhausted ballot. The election
threshold shall be calculated. Tabulation shall then
proceed sequentially as follows:
(1) if the number of continuing candidates
whose vote totals exceed the election threshold is
equal to two, those two candidates are nominated, and
the tabulation is complete; if the number of
continuing candidates is equal to or less than two,
then those continuing candidates are nominated, and
the tabulation is complete; otherwise, the tabulation
continues to (2) of this subsection;
(2) if no candidate has a vote total that
exceeds the election threshold, the tabulation
continues to (3) of this subsection; if at least one
continuing candidate has a vote total that exceeds the
election threshold, then the continuing candidate with
the highest vote total is nominated, the number of
surplus votes for the candidate shall be calculated,
and the surplus fraction for the candidate shall be
calculated; the new transfer value of each vote cast
for the candidate shall be calculated; votes for the
candidate shall be added, at their new transfer
values, to the totals of each ballot's highest-ranked
continuing candidates or counted as exhausted ballots,
and a new round begins under (1) of this subsection;
in all subsequent rounds, candidates elected under
this paragraph have vote totals equal to the election
threshold;
(3) the candidate with the fewest votes is
defeated; then, if the number of continuing candidates
is equal to two, all continuing candidates are
elected, and the tabulation is complete; otherwise,
votes for the defeated candidate shall cease to be
counted for the defeated candidate and shall be added,
at their current transfer values, to the total of the
next-ranked continuing candidate on each ballot or
counted as exhausted ballots, and a new round begins
under (1) of this subsection.
(d) When counting primary or special primary
ranked-choice election ballots,
(1) a ballot assigning a particular ranking
to more than one candidate for an office shall be
declared invalid when the double ranking is reached;
(2) if a ballot skips a ranking, then the
election board shall count the next ranking; and
(3) if there is a tie vote between
continuing candidates, the procedures in AS 15.15.460
and AS 15.20.430 - 15.20.530 shall be followed.
(e) In this section,
(1) "continuing candidate" means a
candidate that has not been defeated or nominated;
(2) "election threshold" means the number
of votes sufficient for a candidate to be nominated;
the election threshold is calculated by dividing the
total number of votes for continuing candidates in the
first round by three and rounding up to four decimal
places;
(3) "exhausted ballot" means a ballot that
is not counted for a continuing candidate for one or
more of the following reasons:
(A) it does not rank a continuing
candidate;
(B) its highest continuing ranking contains
an overvote; or
(C) it includes two or more consecutive
skipped rankings before its highest continuing
ranking;
(4) "highest continuing ranking" means the
highest ranking for a continuing candidate;
(5) "overvote" means the assignment by a
voter of the same ranking to more than one candidate;
(6) "ranking" means the number assigned by
a voter to a candidate to express the voter's choice
for that candidate; a ranking of "1" is the highest
ranking, followed by "2," and then "3," and so on;
(7) "round" means an instance of the
sequence of voting tabulation in a primary or special
primary election;
(8) "skipped ranking" means a ranking blank
on a ballot on which a voter has ranked another
candidate at a subsequent ranking;
(9) "surplus" means a positive difference
between a candidate's vote total and the election
threshold;
(10) "surplus fraction" means the number
equal to a candidate's surplus divided by the
candidate's vote total, calculated to four decimal
places and ignoring any remainder;
(11) "transfer value" means the proportion
of a vote that a ballot will contribute to its highest
continuing ranking; each ballot begins with a transfer
value of one; if a ballot transfers from a nominated
candidate with a surplus, the ballot receives a new
transfer value that is calculated by multiplying the
surplus fraction of the nominated candidate by the
current transfer value of the ballot, calculated to
four decimal places and ignoring any remainder.
* Sec. 13. AS 15.15.360(a)(1) is amended to read:
(1) A voter may mark a ballot only by
filling in, making "X" marks, diagonal, horizontal, or
vertical marks, solid marks, stars, circles,
asterisks, checks, or plus signs that are clearly
spaced in the oval opposite the name of the candidate,
proposition, or question that the voter desires to
designate. In addition, a voter may mark a ballot at a
primary or special primary election by the use of
roman or Arabic numerals that are clearly spaced in
one of the squares opposite the name of the candidate
that the voter desires to rank.
* Sec. 14. AS 15.15.360(a)(4) is amended to read:
(4) Except as provided in AS 15.15.350(c)
for primary and special primary election ballots, if
[IF] a voter marks more names than there are persons
to be elected to the office, the votes for candidates
for that office may not be counted.
* Sec. 15. AS 15.15.370 is amended to read:
Sec. 15.15.370. Completion of ballot count;
certificate. When the count of ballots is completed,
and in no event later than the day after the election,
the election board shall make a certificate in
duplicate of the results. The certificate includes the
number of votes cast for each candidate, including the
number of votes at each round of the primary or
special primary ranked-choice voting tabulation
process under AS 15.15.350(c), and the number of votes
for and against each proposition, yes or no on each
question, and any additional information prescribed by
the director. The election board shall, immediately
upon completion of the certificate or as soon
thereafter as the local mail service permits, send in
one sealed package to the director one copy of the
certificate and the register. In addition, all ballots
properly cast shall be mailed to the director in a
separate, sealed package. Both packages, in addition
to an address on the outside, shall clearly indicate
the precinct from which they come. Each board shall,
immediately upon completion of the certification and
as soon thereafter as the local mail service permits,
send the duplicate certificate to the respective
election supervisor. The director may authorize
election boards in precincts in those areas of the
state where distance and weather make mail
communication unreliable to forward their election
results by telephone, telegram, or radio. The director
may authorize the unofficial totaling of votes on a
regional basis by election supervisors, tallying the
votes as indicated on duplicate certificates. To
assure adequate protection, the director shall
prescribe the manner in which the ballots, registers,
and all other election records and materials are
thereafter preserved, transferred, and destroyed.
* Sec. 16. AS 15.15.450 is amended to read:
Sec. 15.15.450. Certification of state ballot
counting review. Upon completion of the state ballot
counting review for a primary or special primary
election, the director shall certify the two persons
receiving the greatest majority and the second
greatest majority of votes for the office for which
those persons were candidates as nominated to the
general election ballot, and, for a general election,
the director shall certify the person receiving the
largest number of votes for the office for which that
person was a candidate as elected to that office and
shall certify the approval of a justice or judge not
rejected by a majority of the voters voting on the
question. The director shall issue to the elected
candidates and approved justices and judges a
certificate of their election or approval. The
director shall also certify the results of a
proposition and other question except that the
lieutenant governor shall certify the results of an
initiative, referendum, or constitutional amendment."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 11, line 16:
Delete "number of votes and the second greatest
number"
Insert "majority of votes and the second greatest
majority"
Page 13, line 13, following "ballots.":
Insert "(a)"
Page 13, following line 23:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(b) The director shall include instructions on
primary and special primary election ballots directing
the voter to rank candidates for an office in order of
preference and to rank as many choices as the voter
wishes, but not to assign the same ranking to more
than one candidate."
Page 13, line 28:
Delete "number of votes and the second greatest
number"
Insert "majority of votes and the second greatest
majority"
Page 13, line 31:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 3:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 9:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 10:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 11:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 13:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 14:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 15:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 14, line 17:
Delete "number"
Insert "majority"
Page 22, line 28:
Delete "most"
Insert "greatest majority and second greatest
majority of"
Page 23, line 16:
Delete "may vote for any candidate listed"
Insert "must rank the candidates in the numerical
order of your preference, ranking as many candidates
as you wish. Your second, third, and subsequent ranked
choices will be counted only if the candidate you
ranked first does not receive enough votes to continue
on to the next round of counting, so ranking a second,
third, or subsequent choice will not hurt your first-
choice candidate. Your ballot will be counted
regardless of whether you choose to rank one, two, or
more candidates for each office, but it will not be
counted if you assign the same ranking to more than
one candidate for the same office"
Page 23, line 17:
Delete "most"
Insert "greatest majority and second greatest
majority of"
Page 23, line 28:
Delete "may vote for any candidate listed"
Insert "must rank the candidates in the numerical
order of your preference, ranking as many candidates
as you wish. Your second, third, and subsequent ranked
choices will be counted only if the candidate you
ranked first does not receive enough votes to continue
on to the next round of counting, so ranking a second,
third, or subsequent choice will not hurt your first-
choice candidate. Your ballot will be counted
regardless of whether you choose to rank one, two, or
more candidates for each office, but it will not be
counted if you assign the same ranking to more than
one candidate for the same office"
Page 23, line 29:
Delete "most"
Insert "greatest majority and second greatest
majority of"
Page 25, following line 23:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 59. AS 15.80.010 is amended by adding a new
paragraph to read:
(46) "ranked-choice voting" means the
method of casting and tabulating votes at a primary or
special primary election in which voters rank
candidates in order of preference and in which
tabulation proceeds in sequential rounds in which
last-place candidates are defeated and the candidates
with the greatest majority of votes and the second
greatest majority of votes are nominated to appear on
the general election ballot."
Page 26, line 9, following "NONPARTISAN":
Insert "RANKED-CHOICE OPEN"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX objected.
6:08:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN offered that Amendment 2 provides an
opportunity to include "ranked-choice voting" in this bill. He
explained that "ranked-choice voting" in multi-winner elections
maximizes the effectiveness of every vote to ensure that as many
voters as possible will help elect a candidate they rank highly.
It minimizes wasted votes and the impact of tactical voting,
allows voters to have more choices, encourages positive
campaigning collation building, upholds both minority
representation, and the principle of majority rule. Due to its
proven history, its emphasis on candidates rather than parties
in its ability to allow voters to express their full honest
preference on the ballots, ranked-choice voting is the form of
fair representative voting best suited for use in the United
States elections. Recently, he advised, the State of Maine
decided to take this route and they are the first state and,
were Alaska to do this it would be the second state.
6:09:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said she was unsure whether she really
opposed this amendment as it was fairly complicated, but she
would certainly look into the amendment as the bill moved on to
the next committee of referral, assuming it so moved.
6:10:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS described it as a monster of an
amendment, shared Representative LeDoux's intrigue having
followed ranked-choice voting (RCV) quite a bit, and noted the
State of Maine initiative made Maine the first state, but
several municipalities may have ranked-choice voting. He asked
Representative Eastman to explain how this would interact with
the bill as written, whether it would be an ornament on top or
would effectively replace it.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN responded that there many way of
performing ranked-choice voting, and in this case the bill
creates a top two results of a primary that go off into a run-
off in the general remains as is, the amendment revamps the
primary portion of the bill completely. For example, it comes
up in a situation where "you have so many candidates who run for
the office based on however many candidates run" and then
calculate those top two and those top two would go on, and from
there the bill would be unchanged. He explained that part of
that is because it's the bill in front of the committee and that
would have been a completely different bill to carry that into
the general, but also, he further explained, research found that
[Alaska's] constitution may have a prohibition, at least in the
gubernatorial race, against ranked-choice voting in the general
election for the governor.
6:12:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS surmised that basically the
primary election would be a ranked-choice vote, and then the top
two coming out of that ranked-choice vote primary election would
advance to the general, and it would be the top two.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN answered in the affirmative.
6:12:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether it would still be an open
primary system under Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN responded that there is nothing that
would say it would have to change, and that could be another
discussion point if there was a reason to change it. Ranked-
choice voting, he explained, is not mutually exclusive to
nonpartisan in any manner. There could still be the same
opportunity to identify as a particular party candidate but the
party would not be controlling who could file for office, and
who could be part of that first election.
6:13:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether the State of Maine has an
open primary, because her office had not identified the State of
Maine as having an open primary.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN replied that he thought Representative
LeDoux was correct, but he was not an expert on that part of the
process.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX related that she would be willing to look
into this. It appears Representative Kreiss-Tomkins may also be
fascinated by the idea and he is the chair of the next committee
of referral, she offered.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS concurred with Representative
LeDoux's comments, and described the amendment as a knuckle
ball.
6:14:15 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN said that he does not support this amendment, and
referred to Alpheus Bullard, Legislative Legal and Research
Services, 4/4/17 memorandum directed to Representative Eastman,
page 3, last two sentences of the first paragraph, which read as
follows:
Note that the language required to implement a "multi-
winner" ranked-choice system defines simplification.
Given the time allotted, I used the language of
Fairvote's multi-winner ranked-choice system,
modifying it only as necessary or as appropriate to a
"two-winner" system
CHAIR CLAMAN commented that this is an interesting idea and
there is the notion that ranked-choice voting is also sometimes
called the "instant run-off method." He opined that, at least
with regard to the state's nonpartisan municipal elections, the
instant run-off would be a positive thing particularly in the
mayoral races where 25 percent of the voters show up for the
first go-round which turns out to be a run-off, and about 15
percent of the voters show up for the second round. He
described, with regard to instant run-offs and ranked-choice it
would be a service to the voters to not go through the cost.
6:15:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX maintained her objection.
6:15:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN related that he appreciated the comments
from the committee as this is something that hasn't been tried
before, noting a desire to change something for the better after
carefully considering what would be considered "the better," and
that he offered the amendment as part of that conversation. The
drafter of the amendment noted there had to be a number of
caveats to account for all of the different potential outcomes
of tie-votes, such as incorrectly marking a ballot and so forth,
which required complexity in the language which was unavoidable.
He stressed that there was no slight to the drafter who put in a
huge amount of time drafting the amendment. Representative
Eastman withdrew Amendment 2, with the understanding that
hopefully this amendment could be part of the understanding
moving forward.
6:16:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS commented that he is supportive of
the bill and intrigued by Amendment 2, and was excited to see
the bill and amendment in the next committee of referral.
6:17:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP commented that he does not support the bill
and believes HB 200 intentionally dilutes the validity of having
political parties, the purpose of having primary elections is so
that voters can see which candidate best supports their party
views, and it introduces mischief into the process by having
insincere candidates committing to carrying out the platform of
the party on behalf of many voters.
6:18:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD noted that the policy of the bill had
not been vetted well and that she found it disturbing because
the process in which people are elected, and the people in
power, is of the upmost importance to the people of Alaska. She
said she does not support HB 200.
6:19:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER said he was intrigued by this bill.
6:19:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that like many of his
constituents, he looked at the trend in the state and the
effectiveness of its current primary process and the relatively
new trend of people running in primaries and then resigning or
moving to a different ticket, and said he could not imagine that
this happens often in a lot of other states. Due to that issue,
there is a desire to step away from that trend and this bill
might become a vehicle to do that, except he does not support
the bill's current language.
6:20:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX pointed out that this is the third
committee hearing on this bill and; therefore, it could not be
said that this bill was being fast tracked.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX, in response to comments made in a
previous committee hearing, offered to make available a
memorandum from Legislative Council directed to Legislative
Legal and Research Services advising how it is to prioritize its
work. She expressed there is nothing in that memorandum to
suggest that minority amendments [or requests] be placed at the
bottom of the barrel.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX advised that for the reasons previously
stated, this is a good bill and she would appreciate moving it
to the next committee of referral.
6:22:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER moved to report CSHB 200, Version 30-
LS0038\U out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD objected.
6:22:23 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Kreiss-Tomkins,
LeDoux, Fansler, and Claman voted in favor of moving CSHB 200
out of committee. Representatives Reinbold, Kopp, and Eastman
voted against it. Therefore, CSHB 200(JUD) was reported out of
the House Judiciary Standing Committee by a vote of 4-3.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB200 Draft Proposed CS ver U 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Sponsor Statement 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Explanation of Changes ver U 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Sectional Analysis ver U 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Bill Highlights 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Sectional Analysis ver O 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Document-Washington Supreme Court Ruling 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Documents-Top 2 Primary FAQs for Candidates - Elections & Voting - WA Secretary of State 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Additional Document-Top Two Primaries Nationally 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Document-Letters 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Additional Document-Legal Opinion 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Additional Document-Leg Research Report Voter Turnout 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Document-Additional Letters of Support 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Opposing Document-Letters of Opposition 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Opposing Document-Letter and Articles Kenneth Jacobus April 10th, 2017 4.15.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Opposing Document-Letter and Article Kenneth Jacobus April 11th, 2017 4.15.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Amendments #1-2 4.15.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Amendments #1-2 HJUD Final Votes 4.15.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Fiscal Note OOG-DOE 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB013 ver O 4.14.17.PDF |
HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Sponsor Statement 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Explanation of Changes 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB13 Supporting Document - Timeline for Korematsu's Resolution 2.17.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM HSTA 2/18/2017 11:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Supporting Document-Korematsu v US 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Supporting Document-Research Document 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 HJUD PowerPoint Presentation 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 HJUD PowerPoint Presentation 4.14.17.pptx |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Fiscal Note OOG-OMB 4.14.17.PDF |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |