Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 106
03/17/2005 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB36 | |
| HB178 | |
| HB12 | |
| HB34 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 178 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 186 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | SB 36 | ||
SB 36-ABSENTEE BALLOTS 8:07:19 AM CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business was CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 36(JUD), "An Act relating to absentee ballots." CHAIR SEATON said there had been questions raised at the prior hearing of SB 36, regarding the direct submission of applications to the Division of Elections, and what that means. 8:08:24 AM CHAIR SEATON directed attention to a legislative intent letter [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: The legislature understands and intends that the requirement to "submit the application directly to the division of elections" means that no intermediary organization will control the applications which could cause delay in their submission to the Division nor are the ballots available for data mining by individuals or other organizations. The language of "direct return" is not meant to prevent deposit into the US mail, Fed Ex, or other expedited delivery system by a friend, relative or others. CHAIR SEATON said the legislative intent letter could be done conceptually, because there may be typographical errors. He asked if the intent letter is acceptable to the sponsor. 8:09:32 AM DAVID STANCLIFF, Staff to Senator Gene Therriault, Alaska State Legislature, speaking on behalf of Senator Therriault, sponsor, indicated support of the language [in the legislative intent letter]. 8:10:28 AM LAURA GLAISER, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, said [the language in the legislative intent letter] is perfect and helpful. It makes it clear how the legislature would like the division to deal with the absentee by-mail ballots. 8:11:30 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO directed attention to the third line of the legislative intent letter and the phrase, "which could cause delay". He emphasized the word "could". He said what the legislature is really trying to prevent is data mining. MS. GLAISER agreed that there is a concern regarding data mining. She stated that the additional concern is in regard to organizations that had, in order to mine the data, caused a significant delay. She explained as follows: We had absentee, by-mail applications that were signed by an individual, that were driven by a particular party, and those were turned into our division almost a month after the voter signed them. So, that's what we're trying to prevent; that caused significant delay in delivery of the ballot. And that's what ... breaks our hearts; that's what made us work ... 24 hours, for weeks on end, to try and get those processed. So, ... that cause delay is ... equally important to the division - and I think to everybody who's concerned about a voter's right to receive a ballot - as the data mining, which interferes with their confidentiality. So, I think they both have equal weight of importance to the division. 8:13:39 AM CHAIR SEATON indicated the following amendments to the legislative intent letter: On the third line of the letter: Between "applications" and "which" Insert "in a manner" On the fourth line of the letter: Between "nor" and "the ballots" Delete "are" Insert "would" 8:14:14 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would like to see "this language or the conceptual amendment be put in as a legislative intent section." He clarified that he would like it to be Section 1 of the bill. 8:14:46 AM CHAIR SEATON said he doesn't think that "this is going to be misread," but he asked if the sponsor would prefer that the language in the legislative intent be included as a section of the bill. 8:15:25 AM MR. STANCLIFF opined that the issue is whether or not "we" trust the directors of the Division of Elections to have the discretion to decide what is worth investigating and what is not. He said, "This is certainly preferable than trying to dictate to them in the body of the bill exactly what they should do." 8:16:15 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO directed attention to the last sentence, which read: The language of "direct return" is not meant to prevent deposit into the US mail, Fed Ex, or other expedited delivery system by a friend, relative or others. REPRESENTATIVE GATTO indicated that he has been considering an amendment [that would insert on page 1, line 13, following "elections."]: "In this subsection, "directly" means in person, by electronic transmission, by mail, or by other common carrier." He said, "It's a way of phrasing it in the affirmative to say exactly what you mean, rather than what you didn't mean." He said he would like to substitute one sentence for another. 8:17:51 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO, in response to remarks by Chair Seaton and Representative Gruenberg, explained that he had originally intended for the sentence to be added in the text of the bill; however, he said after speaking previously to Ms. Glaiser, he thinks it could be added within the language of the legislative intent letter. 8:18:36 AM CHAIR SEATON asked if anyone has a problem with exchanging [the last sentence of the legislative intent letter] for the sentence suggested by Representative Gatto, [text provided previously]. 8:19:34 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the language proposed by Representative Gatto would "narrow this a little further." He explained, "The way it could have been read was that the voter had to hand carry it to the director; and what the Gatto language means is you can put it in the mail." He said he thinks that it's obviously the intent of the bill to "allow you to put it in the mail." He said he prefers [the language at the end of the legislative intent letter], which would broaden the bill to mean "you don't have to do it yourself, but you can give it to a friend to put it in the mail." He indicated that he hopes the committee would not adopt Representative Gatto's amending language. 8:21:19 AM CHAIR SEATON said, "... Since we've got this as a new Section 1, as intent, ... I think it's pretty clear, as we're just intending that it doesn't restrict you from using a friend or relative. So, I'd prefer leaving the language the way we have it in the ... legislative intent." REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked, "Does that go in Section 1?" CHAIR SEATON answered, "No, it will be a new section ahead of Section 1; it'll be legislative intent, and it'll be right in the bill." He asked Representative Gatto, "You didn't make an amendment; we were just talking about it, right?" 8:21:46 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO replied, "I didn't, right. This was just a thought. I didn't really plan on submitting it as an amendment unless nothing else had happened." 8:22:04 AM CHAIR SEATON stated, "I would move to include this legislative intent in the bill, as Section 1 in the bill." 8:22:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO [objected]. He said "Fed Ex" is a specific company. He said that group, plus UPS, for example, "must fall under a name." He explained that he didn't want to mention one company and exclude another. 8:22:47 AM CHAIR SEATON said he would consider it a friendly amendment to delete "Fed Ex" and "other" [from the legislative intent letter]. In response to a question from Representative Gatto, he said he thinks the word "expedited" is necessary, because "we don't want it to be a slow delivery through someplace else." 8:23:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked what the phrase meant that includes the words "expedited" and "by a friend, relative or others". 8:23:59 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that Representative Gardner is referring to the modifier of the sentence. He suggested that the sentence should read: The language of "direct return" is not meant to prevent deposit by a friend, relative or others into the US mail. 8:24:23 AM CHAIR SEATON said that would be fine. REPRESENTATIVE GATTO suggested changing the word "other" to "similar". 8:25:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said, "What about 'designated person'?" REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said, "I'll remove my objection." 8:25:28 AM CHAIR SEATON asked if there was any further objection to adopting the Conceptual Legislative Intent language [as amended]. In response to Representative Gardner, he clarified that the last sentence of the legislative intent letter now read: The language of "direct return" is not meant to prevent deposit by a friend, relative or others into the US mail, or expedited delivery system. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG interjected, "or an expedited". CHAIR SEATON responded, "Yeah, that's fine." 8:25:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG requested removing "The language of". REPRESENTATIVE GATTO responded, "That's a good idea." 8:26:17 AM CHAIR SEATON, upon hearing no objections, announced that [the legislative intent letter] was adopted. 8:26:32 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report CSSB 36(JUD), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being no objections HCS CSSB 36(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|