Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/08/2004 08:07 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 523-VOTERS/VOTING/POLITICAL PARTIES/ELECTIONS [Contains discussion of HB 414.] Number 0070 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the first order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 523, "An Act relating to qualifications of voters, voter registration, voter residence, precinct boundary modification, recognized political parties, voters unaffiliated with political parties, early voting, absentee voting, ballot counting, voting by mail, initiative, referendum, recall, and definitions; and providing for an effective date." CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that he would be leaving [soon after the start of the meeting]; therefore, he would be handing the gavel over to Representative Holm. Number 0075 LAURA GLAISER, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, noted that there is a sectional analysis [in the committee packet]. In response to a question from Chair Weyhrauch, she clarified that the sectional analysis relates to the committee substitute (CS) for HB 523, [Version 23-GH2021\H, Kurtz, 4/7/04]. She remarked that the title of the bill is kind of a sponsor statement in itself; therefore, she did not provide one for the committee. Number 0201 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested Ms. Glaiser address the definition of political party. MS. GLAISER directed the committee's attention to Section 42 of the bill, which defines political party as follows: *Sec. 42. AS 15.60.010(21) is amended to read: (21) "political party" means an organized group of voters that represents a political program and that either nominated a candidate for statewide office [GOVERNOR] at the preceding general election or has registered voters in the state equal in number to at least three percent of the total votes cast for governor at the preceding general election at which a governor was elected; MS. GLAISER noted that "statewide office" is identified as: governor, lieutenant governor, U.S. Senator, and U.S. Representative. Current law, she reviewed, says that the 3 percent is based on the governor's race. She explained that Jim Sykes argued that he garnered approximately 7 percent in the [U.S.] Senate race, so "he wanted a different marker." She indicated that [Section 42] was the division's proposal to deal with a lawsuit that resulted because of this issue. Number 0346 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON posed the following scenario: A party nominates someone for governor and obtains "15 percent," thus [qualifying as] a political party. Two years later, the person running for that party only receives 2 percent. He surmised that the party would then cease to exist until another election at which it nominates someone who receives over 3 percent. MS. GLAISER said she couldn't respond because she hasn't "looked at it that way." She explained, "We were trying to address the judge's concerns in that lawsuit." REPRESENTATIVE SEATON opined that so much work was done on the language in [HB 414] so that [the previously stated scenario] wouldn't happen. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested the committee could take the applicable section from HB 414 and [apply it to HB 523]. MS. GLAISER responded that the division would have no problem implementing that. Number 0536 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for HB 523, Version 23-GH2021\H, Kurtz, 4/7/04, as a work draft. Number 0549 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ objected for discussion purposes. He inquired as to the difference between the original bill and Version H. MS. GLAISER reiterated that the changes are listed in the sectional analysis. Number 0623 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG mentioned a confidentiality section. He asked, "Is this information, even though it's not open to public inspection, ... available to the Child Support Enforcement Division?" MS. GLAISER said she could check that out. She continued as follows: This has been a policy of the Division of Elections, but we've had requests lately for copies of people's records with their signature. And when someone asked me that question, it ... gave me some concern, because we talk about theft of identity. And handing over a signature - that's what warranted this discussion and the addition to the bill. The policy of the division has always been to share with other agencies, and there's usually a signature that's involved from somebody from an agency with a request; but I'd be happy to check with the Department of Law to make sure that that's still available. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG requested that Ms. Glaiser do so. He mentioned a bill heard recently in the House Judiciary Standing Committee, in which there was a provision that made employment security records available for law enforcement purposes, and there was a separate statute relating to making information available to [the Child Support Enforcement Division]. He indicated that he would like Ms. Glaiser to find any existing standardized language regarding this issue. MS. GLAISER said, "Certainly." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to a question, said HB 414 passed out of the [House] Judiciary Standing Committee. Number 0799 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON noted that the entire section regarding political parties was taken out [of HB 414 during its hearing in the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee]. Number 0825 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ removed his objection to adopting the committee substitute (CS) for HB 523, Version 23-GH2021\H, Kurtz, 4/7/04, as a work draft; therefore, Version H was before the committee. Number 0834 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, to delete the current language in Section 42 and replace it with the language defining political party as found in HB 414 when it was in the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee. VICE-CHAIR HOLM asked if there was any objection. No objection was stated and Conceptual Amendment 1 was treated as adopted. Number 0895 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG turned attention to page 4, lines [13- 19], which read as follows: (1) [,BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, THE] publication of notice on three different days in a daily newspaper of general circulation, if [SUCH] a daily newspaper of general circulation is published in the house district where the precinct is located; however, if a daily newspaper of general circulation is not published in the house district where the precinct is located, public notice must include [,BY] posting written notice in a [THREE] conspicuous place [PLACES] in the designated precinct; REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated that [the above provision] would cause a problem, because there are daily papers in Anchorage, Juneau, and Fairbanks, for example, that are "not published." He suggested that the criterion would be equally well served if the language read "circulated" instead of "published". MS. GLAISER responded that [the division] would not have a problem with that. Number 1001 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL questioned whether the term "general circulation" is broad enough. VICE-CHAIR HOLM noted that in his house district there is a paper, but there isn't a paper in the house district next to his. He added, "It's circulated there, but it's not published there." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that the question isn't where the paper is published, but whether a written posting is wanted in the house district. He stated that the subsidiary question is whether the written posting, if wanted, should be in one, two, or three places. Representative Gruenberg recollected that when the boundaries of a precinct are modified, established, or abolished, there must be a notification to the registered voters by postcard, for example. MS. GLAISER offered her belief that is true. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he is not certain that just having a posting will do much except perhaps in a rural place where it may be helpful. He said he would like time to think about what to do with the aforementioned words on page 4, [lines 13-19, text previously provided]. Number 1130 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM stated he is curious why the number of conspicuous places was reduced from three to one. MS. GLAISER replied that there are many areas where the notice had to be put on one board three times. She pointed out that in those areas where there are 16,000 voters, [there are notices in] a newspaper, as well as individual notification. She explained that the change had been made in an attempt to improve the process. Number 1188 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked how often precinct boundary designations are modified. MS. GLAISER answered that certainly during the [U.S.] Census and reapportionment there are times of incorporation and [borough] votes. She confirmed that they are not modified frequently, which was another reason why "this came up for discussion in the division." In response to a question from Representative Gruenberg, she said she is not certain whether precincts are always the same for local elections as well as for state elections, but she offered to find out. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recollected that the legislation he introduced [in the past] not only required notification by postcard when boundaries changed, but also when the polling place changed. He drew attention to the language [on page 4, beginning on line 10], which read as follows: The director shall give full public notice when precinct boundaries are designated an when the boundaries of a precinct are modified or when a precinct is established or abolished. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "Why not also when the polling place changes?" MS. GLAISER said that could be added to the current law. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Ms. Glaiser to consider that. Number 1293 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed to [page 4], line 21, which specifies notification to municipal clerks. He indicated that some house districts cover villages that [do not have municipal clerks]. He suggested it would be advantageous to expand the term municipal clerks. He noted that Seward has two weekly newspapers and the bill addresses newspapers of daily circulation, which doesn't include any of the local newspapers. Number 1421 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ directed attention to Section 3, regarding confidential voter information. He noted, "We just passed some legislation that made certain information for victims of domestic violence confidential. He asked if there is a provision for that, and stated that if there is not, there should be one. MS. GLAISER said she didn't know. VICE-CHAIR HOLM told Representative Berkowitz that Ms. Glaiser had earlier in the meeting been asked to research this issue. MS. GLAISER said, "You'll be interested to know that the new voter registration systems that we've been looking at ... have the ability to hide records so they don't even print out, and a person can choose that." In response to a question, she confirmed that [the division] is currently upgrading. Number 1540 VICE-CHAIR HOLM turned to Amendment 2, which read as follows [with some hand written changes]: Page 1, line 5, following "counting,": Insert "voting electronically," Page 20, following line 26: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 39. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read: VOTING BY MAIL AND ELECTRONICALLY. Not later than January 31, 2005, the director of the division of elections shall provide a report to the legislature on the feasibility, costs, and benefits of authorizing a system of voting by mail and electronically." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Number 1565 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked if [Amendment 2] incorporates some of the concerns that were voiced during a previous electronic voting discussion regarding a "Minority bill." VICE-CHAIR HOLM answered yes. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ, in response to a question from Representative Gruenberg, clarified that he just wants [Amendment 2] compared to the work that has been done on the other bill. Number 1597 MS. GLAISER responded that she doesn't see [Amendment 2] as "separate from the other piece of legislation." She revealed that she would be certifying elections through December and asked if the date could be extended. She stated that she is sure that the committee would want research done, and she said she doesn't know what [Chair Weyhrauch] would like. VICE-CHAIR HOLM suggested that the committee set aside [Amendment 2]. Number 1660 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ announced that he would, at every opportunity, offer an amendment that "would remove the capability to keep track of people's party affiliation and publish that in any place, including voter registration." REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL rebutted that he would oppose that amendment every time. Number 1696 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that [HB 523] seems to be mainly "housekeeping/technical stuff." He directed attention to Section 1 of the bill, regarding AS 15.05.020. He announced that he and his staff would be looking to find out where problems have arisen in the past in court, regarding [that statute], and he asked for help from the division and others in advance of the next hearing on HB 523. Number 1787 VICE-CHAIR HOLM announced that HB 523 was heard and held.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|