Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 120
03/18/2013 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Commission on Judicial Conduct | |
| Select Committee on Legislative Ethics | |
| HB104 | |
| HB140 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 57 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 140 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 18, 2013
1:04 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Charisse Millett
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Commission on Judicial Conduct
James Christopher Brown - Anchorage
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Gary J. Turner - Soldotna
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
HOUSE BILL NO. 104
"An Act relating to election practices and procedures; relating
to the election of an advisory school board in a regional
educational attendance area; and providing for an effective
date."
- MOVED CSHB 104(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 140
"An Act relating to the information that must be included with
certain notices provided for the proposed adoption, amendment,
or repeal of a regulation."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 57
"An Act adopting the Alaska Entity Transactions Act; relating to
changing the form of entities, including corporations,
partnerships, limited liability companies, business trusts, and
other organizations; amending Rule 79, Alaska Rules of Civil
Procedure, and Rules 602(b)(2), 602(c), and 605.5, Alaska Rules
of Appellate Procedure; and providing for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 104
SHORT TITLE: ELECTION PROCEDURES; REAA ADVISORY BOARDS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/06/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/06/13 (H) STA, JUD
02/19/13 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/19/13 (H) Moved CSHB 104(STA) Out of Committee
02/19/13 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/20/13 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) NT 5DP 2NR
02/20/13 (H) DP: HUGHES, ISAACSON, GATTIS, KREISS-
TOMKINS, LYNN
02/20/13 (H) NR: MILLETT, KELLER
02/27/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/27/13 (H) Heard & Held
02/27/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/04/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/04/13 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/11/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/11/13 (H) Heard & Held
03/11/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/15/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/15/13 (H) Moved CSHB 104(JUD) Out of Committee
03/15/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/18/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 140
SHORT TITLE: NOTICE FOR REGULATION ADOPTION
SPONSOR(s): REINBOLD
02/22/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/13 (H) JUD
03/18/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
JAMES CHRISTOPHER BROWN, Appointee
Commission on Judicial Conduct
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Commission
on Judicial Conduct.
GARY J. TURNER, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director
Division of Elections
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 104, answered
questions.
MARGERET PATON WALSH, Assistant Attorney General
Labor and State Affairs Section
Civil Division (Anchorage)
Department of Law
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 104, answered
questions.
TED MADSEN, Staff
Representative Gruenberg
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 104, explained
Amendment 5.
REPRESENTATIVE LORA REINBOLD
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 140.
ROBERT PEARSON, Staff
Representative Lora Reinbold
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 140 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Reinbold.
CATHY P. FOERSTER, Chair
Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC)
Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concern with HB 140.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:04:43 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:04 p.m. Representatives Keller,
Gruenberg, Foster, LeDoux, Lynn, and Pruitt were present at the
call to order. Representative Millett arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
^Confirmation Hearing(s):
^Commission on Judicial Conduct
Confirmation Hearing(s):
Commission on Judicial Conduct
1:05:08 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
consideration of the appointment of James Christopher Brown to
the Commission on Judicial Conduct.
1:05:34 PM
JAMES CHRISTOPHER BROWN, Appointee, Commission on Judicial
Conduct, related his appreciation for the opportunity to serve a
second term on the Commission on Judicial Conduct as he was
originally appointed in 2009. He related that he has enjoyed
his education as to how the Alaska court system works and
benefited from his interaction with the attorneys and judges.
Furthermore, he opined that he's been able to make a significant
and worthwhile contribution to the analysis and review of cases.
Mr. Brown further opined that the commission does an excellent
job of representing and protecting both the rights of the
state's citizens as well as the rights and obligations of the
officers of the court. Therefore, Mr. Brown said he looked
forward to continuing to serve on the Commission on Judicial
Conduct.
1:06:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG inquired as to how many cases annually
the commission finds probable cause with which to proceed.
MR. BROWN estimated that it's a couple to a few cases each year
as the overwhelming preponderance of the complaints address
legal issues rather than judicial ethics. In further response
to Representative Gruenberg, Mr. Brown said he didn't find any
cases that appear fabricated or vexatious and vindictive against
judges who render adverse.
1:08:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to the percentage of cases,
from those in which probable cause was found to proceed, were
found to have engaged in inappropriate conduct.
MR. BROWN, noting that he doesn't have the statistics before
him, relayed that the commission finding probable cause doesn't
always result in what he considered extreme or very serious
consequences, although any informal reprimand or consideration
would be considered as such. Mr. Brown estimated that clearly
more than half of those cases in which the commission finds
probable cause and wishes to further consider result in some
sort of action, whether it be formal or informal action.
1:09:45 PM
CHAIR KELLER reminded members that [signing the reports
regarding appointments to boards and commissions in no way
reflects individual members' approval or disapproval of the
appointees] and that the nominations are merely forwarded to the
full legislature for confirmation or rejection.
^Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
1:10:18 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
consideration of the appointment of Gary Turner to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
1:10:25 PM
GARY J. TURNER, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics, began by informing the committee that he has spent seven
years on the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics and if
confirmed this would be his third term. He noted that two years
ago he served as the chair of the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics and is presently the vice chair. He related
the he enjoys working with the committee, which he characterized
as a group of dedicated people and executive director, Joyce
Anderson. The Selection Committee on Legislative Ethics, he
opined, provides very good guidance to legislators and staff.
The Select Committee on Legislative Ethics is doing a good job,
he stated, particularly when one considers how difficult it can
be to decipher statute. Mr. Turner mentioned that after seven
years on the committee he has learned there are many shades of
grey. In closing, Mr. Turner said he looked forward to
continuing to serve on the Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics.
1:12:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN inquired as what Mr. Turner taught at the
Air Force Academy.
MR. TURNER answered that he taught literature and English
composition.
1:12:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether Mr. Turner found many
cases brought forth maliciously or without any basis in fact.
MR. TURNER replied no, recalling that there may have been a
couple such cases four to five years ago when the executive
branch was undergoing scrutiny that resulted in a number of
ethics complaints.
1:13:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT noted that she sits on the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics with Mr. Turner, whom she said
does a great job and is professional and efficient. She opined
that it's nice to have a member from outside the legislative
environment.
1:14:17 PM
CHAIR KELLER reminded members that [signing the reports
regarding appointments to boards and commissions in no way
reflects individual members' approval or disapproval of the
appointees] and that the nominations are merely forwarded to the
full legislature for confirmation or rejection.
1:14:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN made a motion to forward the names of James
Christopher Brown for the Commission on Judicial Conduct and the
name of Gary J. Turner for the Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics. There being no objection, the names were forwarded.
HB 104-ELECTION PROCEDURES; REAA ADVISORY BOARDS
1:15:04 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 104, "An Act relating to election practices and
procedures; relating to the election of an advisory school board
in a regional educational attendance area; and providing for an
effective date." [Before the committee was CSHB 104, Version
28-GH1983\P, Bullard, 3/12/13, as amended, that was reported
from committee on 3/15/13.]
1:15:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved that the committee rescind its
previous action in moving CSHB 104, Version 28-GH1983\P,
Bullard, 3/12/13, as amended, from committee on 3/15/13.
1:15:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for discussion purposes.
CHAIR KELLER explained that that the committee [in reporting
Version P, as amended, from committee] took action on [Section
9] of the legislation, which has huge policy ramifications. He
opined that [the changes to Section 9] were not sufficiently
discussed or debated. Furthermore, he related his understanding
that [Section 9] is unnecessary as it's a clarification of the
current process due to federal law. Currently, an application
is made available for absentee ballots for those Alaskans who
are in the military or overseas as a special accommodation so
that they can apply electronically. The aforementioned is based
on what the federal law requires. Chair Keller expressed the
need to delete Section 9 of Version P in its entirety as it's
unnecessary.
CHAIR KELLER disclosed that during the last election his staff
regularly acquired from the Division of Elections the list of
those individuals who had applied electronically for an absentee
ballot. The goal was to isolate any new applicants so that
campaign materials could be sent to the new applicants. The
aforementioned technique, one that a number of candidates may
use, requires some sophistication in terms of using the
database. He opined that [Section 9] introduces a campaign
strategy into HB 104, which was not intended. If [Section 9] is
left in HB 104 without amendment, he suggested that it would
provide an advantage to incumbents who would know to watch for
applied absentee ballots the entire year whereas someone
entering the election process later may not have the personnel
or sophistication to [track/target new applicants]. Therefore,
Chair Keller related his preference to delete [Section 9].
1:19:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG related that although he will oppose
the motion to delete [Section 9], as a matter of courtesy he
withdrew his objection to the motion to rescind the committee's
action in reporting CSHB 104, Version P, as amended, from
committee on 3/15/13.
There being no further objection, CSHB 104, Version P, as
amended on 3/15/13, was before the committee.
1:19:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN made a motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment
1, which would delete Section 9 in its entirety from Version P
[as amended on 3/15/13].
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected and inquired as to the
Division of Elections' position.
1:21:44 PM
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the
Lieutenant Governor, explained that the division's intent with
Section 9 was to harmonize with federal law, Uniformed and
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), which allows
military and overseas voters to apply anytime during the
calendar year to receive their ballot electronically whereas
state law and regulation only allow non UOCAVA to apply within
the 15-day window prior to an election. The division thought it
would be a good idea for state law to match federal law.
However, it was not in the state code for the previous election
cycles and the division will continue to perform its business as
it has in the past.
CHAIR KELLER commented that the matter [addressed in Section 9],
due to the huge policy ramifications, could be addressed in
another bill. He then related his understanding that the state
is complying with federal law under the state's existing law.
MS. FENUMIAI confirmed that to be the case.
1:23:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether the division was
operating without state statutory authority when the language on
page 4, lines 20-25, wasn't included.
MS. FENUMIAI pointed out that as currently written AS 15.20.066
specifies that the division can write regulations to address the
use of electronic ballots. The statute further specifies that
the division should consider the timelines and comply with the
same time period that is allowed for absentee in-person voting,
which is 15 days prior to the election. The aforementioned has
been the state's interpretation of how to handle applications
for receipt of ballots electronically. The Military and
Overseas Voters Empowerment Act (MOVE Act) states that military
uniformed citizens are allowed to apply for receipt of an
electronic ballot anytime during the calendar year, which was
not included in state law. Therefore, the state followed the
federal law [to be in compliance with the MOVE Act]. For non-
UOCAVA voters the state law was followed.
1:24:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG again asked whether the division has
been operating without state statutory authority. He then asked
whether the federal government giving [military citizens living
overseas] the right to vote automatically empowers the Division
of Elections to give those voters additional time or is
legislation such as HB 104 necessary to ensure that the division
isn't violating state law.
MS. FENUMIAI specified that the division's interpretation, in
consultation with the Department of Law (DOL), is that the
division doesn't need it to be in state law. She likened it to
the 45-day ballot mailing for UOCAVA voters, which isn't in
state law but is in federal law and the state is complying with
that federal law. Although HB 104 [as currently written,
Version P as amended on 3/15/13] would insert [the 45-day ballot
mailing for UOCAVA voters] in state statute so that it's clear
that it must be done, it doesn't have to be included in state
code because it's in federal law.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated that it's a core legal question
as to whether there is solid authority that gives the division
the legal right to do what it's doing without this language
[proposed in Version P].
CHAIR KELLER disagreed, and echoed Ms. Fenumiai's understanding
that it's not necessary to include it in state law.
1:27:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX related her understanding that the
division is [allowing uniformed services voters and overseas
voters to apply to vote an absentee ballot electronically at any
time during a calendar year] pursuant to federal law. She
questioned whether that [federal law would only apply] to
federal elections or whether it would apply to purely state
elections.
MS. FENUMIAI informed the committee that in Alaska any election
that involves a race for federal office includes every primary
and general election.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed the need to have testimony
from DOL as there is a difference between saying a federal
requirement for voting in state elections versus federal
elections. He offered his understanding that the language "in
federal elections" only refers to those elections for federal
office.
1:28:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that Ms. Fenumiai has answered
that question because each year there is a race for Congress and
thus on the [state] ballot there is a federal question.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that usually
federal laws only apply to election to federal office, but asked
if that's the case.
MS. FENUMIAI clarified, "It's for an election in which there's a
race for a federal office. The federal law covers federal
offices in an election. And in the State of Alaska, the primary
and general election always have a federal office on the ballot.
The U.S. Congressional race is always on the primary and general
election ballot."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether Ms. Fenumiai has an
authority for that interpretation that she can provide.
MS. FENUMIAI replied no, but noted that an attorney is being
contacted for assistance.
1:30:16 PM
MS. FENUMIAI explained that the state has been complying with
the federal MOVE Act, although those statutes haven't been in
the state's code. The state will continue to comply with the
MOVE Act even if those statutes aren't placed in state code
because the division is held accountable for following federal
law. In response to a question, Ms. Fenumiai clarified that the
MOVE Act is an amendment to UOCAVA. After confirming that the
division is following [the MOVE Act] without specific state
statutory authority, Ms. Fenumiai said there is codification in
state law to clarify that ballots for military and overseas
uniformed citizens are mailed 45 days prior to the election.
1:32:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked whether [the MOVE Act] is different
than the Voting Rights Act.
MS. FENUMIAI replied no. She explained that federal assistance
voting folks encouraged the division to insert the 45-day ballot
mailing into state law. However, she confirmed that the Voting
Rights Act provisions aren't in state law because they are in
federal law.
The committee took an at-ease from 1:33 p.m. to 1:50 p.m.
1:50:26 PM
MARGERET PATON WALSH, Assistant Attorney General, Labor and
State Affairs Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of
Law, related her understanding that the bill provides for the
same deadline, a 15-day deadline for an absentee ballot, unless
the individual is a uniformed services voter or overseas voter
who have a year. She related her further understanding that
[Version P, as amended] would extend the deadline of a year to
everyone.
CHAIR KELLER clarified that the committee is contemplating
removing Section 9 from [Version P, as amended]. He offered his
understanding that the question is whether or not it's necessary
for state law to authorize actions, given that the state is
already following the federal law.
MS. PATON WALSH explained that the federal law provides for
different deadlines and rules for uniformed voters overseas and
the state must comply with those regardless of state law. She
characterized it as a straight-forward supremacy issue, and
therefore the state doesn't have any freedom to do anything
differently than what federal law requires. She offered her
understanding that the changes were simply to clarify for voters
what is happening because it creates confusion when state law
provides for something different, but that's not actually how it
works. Therefore, it's an attempt to harmonize the state law so
that it says what will actually happen because that's what will
happen under federal law. Ms. Paton Walsh opined, therefore,
that the change doesn't have to be made, but it's helpful for
statutes to specify what's really going to happen.
1:53:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether the federal law applies
to all races on a ballot that contain races for federal office.
MS. PATON WALSH, noting that the difficulty is the single
ballot, offered her belief that one could make the argument that
the state doesn't have to comply with federal law for elections
that are entirely state elections. However, she cautioned that
the reality is that the division doesn't hold many if any
elections in which there isn't a federal race on the ballot. An
administrative nightmare is created by imposing different rules
on different races in an election that takes place on the same
day. She questioned why that would occur, even if technically
it's an entirely local/state election in which the federal rules
might not apply.
1:55:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether, as a matter of law, the
federal law would apply to state races.
MS. PATON WALSH answered that she didn't know for sure, but
offered her sense that those federal laws apply to federal
elections not state elections. However, she maintained that
federal law might apply.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed the need to be sure that no
argument/legal question can be made to void an election.
MS. PATON WALSH said she was not sure of the hypothetical
situation in which an election could be held invalid as a result
of the presence or absence of this language [in Section 9]. The
reason to include [Section 9], she opined, is that all of the
state's elections effectively involve some kind of federal
office and there is no desire to run two separate election
tracks. Furthermore, all of the elections will provide
absentee-ballot opportunities as required by federal law, which
provides more time to apply than Alaska state law. Since the
state is going to comply with the federal law, it would be
easier and less confusing for voters to have the state law
specify what the Division of Elections is actually doing.
1:58:48 PM
CHAIR KELLER surmised that Representative Gruenberg would
maintain his objection [to the adoption of Conceptual Amendment
1, which would delete Section 9 from Version P, as amended on
3/15/13].
1:59:27 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, Foster,
LeDoux, Lynn, and Keller voted in favor of the adoption of
Conceptual Amendment 1. Representative Gruenberg voted against
it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote of
5-1.
2:00:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Conceptual
Amendment 2, which would insert the language [of Section 9] as
it appears on page 4 of Version P prior to the adoption of
Amendment 3 on 3/15/13.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN objected.
CHAIR KELLER stated that he would be voting against Conceptual
Amendment 2 as it's unnecessary.
2:01:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that what are being
addressed are the rights of service men and women and people
living overseas to vote. The aforementioned is sufficiently
important that the language should be inserted into the
legislation, particularly as there is no harm/risk in doing so.
Without the language, there is the risk of a problem. He
questioned why one would invite a problem when there is no
reason to do so to do anything that might jeopardize their vote.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT, returning to the discussion on the Voting
Rights Act, opined that there are voting related items not in
statute that the state has to uphold. Therefore, he
characterized [Conceptual Amendment 2] as unnecessary and
related that he would be opposing Conceptual.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN emphasized his belief that no member of the
committee wants to jeopardize the voting rights of the U.S.
military located anywhere in the world.
2:03:09 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representative Gruenberg voted in
favor of Conceptual Amendment 2. Representatives Pruitt,
Foster, LeDoux, Lynn, and Keller voted against it. Therefore,
Conceptual Amendment 2 failed to be adopted by a vote of 1-5.
2:03:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 3,
labeled 28-GH1983\P.3, Bullard, 3/14/13, which read:
Page 5, following line 17:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 12. AS 15.20.081(i) is repealed and
reenacted to read:
(i) An absentee ballot application submitted by
a qualified voter or on behalf of a qualified voter is
valid through the two general elections following the
date the application is submitted. If a voter casts an
absentee ballot in accordance with (d) - (f) of this
section, the voter's absentee ballot application
remains valid through the two general elections
following the election in which the ballot was cast.
However, nothing in this subsection requires the
director or an election supervisor to send an absentee
ballot to a voter after the director or election
supervisor has received actual notice that mail sent
to the permanent mailing address of the voter, or a
different address provided by the voter, is
undeliverable to the voter at that address."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 13, line 21:
Delete ", 15.20.081(i),"
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT objected. He recalled testimony last week
"that the Division of Elections has found in many cases when
we've done two out that we're getting a lot of returns coming
back on that second one." He then opined that it's best to have
voters apply for an absentee ballot for each election for which
they wish to obtain an absentee ballot.
The committee took a brief at-ease.
2:05:39 PM
CHAIR KELLER ruled Amendment 3 out of order because it's part of
another bill, HB 12, currently in the House State Affairs
Standing Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG appealed the ruling of the chair and
explained if the ruling of the chair prevails, [Amendment 3]
won't be debated on its merit.
CHAIR KELLER reiterated that Amendment 3 is out of order.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN invited Representative Gruenberg to provide
testimony on HB 12 when and if the House State Affairs Standing
Committee takes it up.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew his challenge of the ruling of
the chair and expressed the hope that HB 12 is scheduled for a
hearing in the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
2:07:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG then asked Chair Keller to reconsider
his ruling and allow Amendment 3 to be divided such that the
portion not in HB 12 can be considered.
CHAIR KELLER said he wouldn't allow Amendment 3 to be divided,
but suggested that a new amendment could be offered if
Representative Gruenberg so desired.
2:09:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Conceptual
Amendment 4, as follows:
Page 13, line 21:
Delete ", 15.20.081(i),"
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG informed the committee that AS
15.20.081(i) read as follows:
(i) An absentee ballot application submitted by
an absent uniformed services voter or by an absent
overseas voter qualifying under AS 15.05.011 is valid
through the next two regularly scheduled general
elections for federal office after the date the
application is submitted. In this subsection, "absent
uniformed services voter" has the meaning given in 42
U.S.C. 1973ff-6.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that Conceptual Amendment 4
would leave existing language in statute, which he opined is
important to ensure that military and overseas voters can apply
for absentee ballot applications through the next two regularly
scheduled general elections for federal office. He offered his
understanding from Ms. Fenumiai that the reason those [statute]
aren't in the federal law is because it was viewed as too
administratively difficult to apply. However, Representative
Gruenberg opined that the small amount of additional
administrative work is well worth providing [uniformed military
and overseas voters] the right to vote.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:11 p.m. to 2:17 p.m.
2:17:13 PM
CHAIR KELLER objected to Conceptual Amendment 4 recalling that
the Division of Elections had testified that [AS 15.20.081(i)]
isn't necessary.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT offered his recollection that the division
had testified at the [3/15/13] hearing regarding the difficulty
of following [uniformed military and overseas voters] over the
course of two general elections as they're a transient
population. He highlighted that the federal government has
already eliminated this provision.
2:18:38 PM
MS. FENUMIAI explained that the division is proposing this
repeal of AS 15.20.081(i) because the federal government
originally included this provision in the MOVE Act, but repealed
it after finding that military populations are very transient
and the address provided in the first year may not be a valid
address two years later. She recalled having over 900 ballots
to UOCAVA voters returned as undeliverable with no forwarding
address following the primary. During the 2012 elections, of
the over 2,600 voters over 1,600 qualified to have their
application good for two general elections either not return
their ballot or it was returned as undeliverable. In response to
a question, Ms. Fenumiai estimated that of the little over 2,600
voters who qualified for the extended absentee ballot
application, about 1,000 ballots were returned to and counted by
the division because about 1,600 were returned as undeliverable
or were not returned at all. Following the primary, over 900
ballots were returned as undeliverable. She highlighted that
the division does make an attempt to contact these [uniformed
military and overseas] voters at the beginning of the year in an
attempt to confirm/update the mailing address. Because the law
exists the division must continue to send these voters [for whom
the inquiry was returned as undeliverable or wasn't returned at
all] a ballot.
2:21:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recalled that per Ms. Fenumiai's
request the following language in Conceptual Amendment 4 was
included:
However, nothing in this subsection requires the
director or an election supervisor to send an absentee
ballot to a voter after the director or election
supervisor has received actual notice that mail sent
to the permanent mailing address of the voter, or a
different address provided by the voter, is
undeliverable to the voter at that address.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether simply adding to [AS
15.20.081(i)] the abovementioned language in Conceptual
Amendment 4 would satisfy her objection and ease the
administrative burden on the division and not disenfranchise
1,000 voters.
MS. FENUMIAI opined that no voter would ever be disenfranchised
because every voter has the opportunity to apply [for an
absentee ballot] at the beginning of every calendar year for all
elections in a calendar year. Furthermore, it's a minor
conflict of state and federal law as the federal government
repealed the provision and the federal voting assistance
program, the sole responsibility of which is to protect the
rights of military and overseas voters, encouraged the repeal of
the MOVE Act.
2:23:12 PM
CHAIR KELLER maintained his objection.
A roll call vote was taken. Representative Gruenberg voted in
favor of Conceptual Amendment 4. Representatives Lynn, Millett,
Pruitt, Foster, LeDoux, and Keller voted against it. Therefore,
Conceptual Amendment 4 failed to be adopted by a vote of 1-6.
2:23:39 PM
CHAIR KELLER informed the committee that the amendment in
committee member's packets labeled 28-GH1983\P.2, Bullard,
3/14/13, is in essence HB 11, which is in the possession of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
2:23:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 5,
labeled 28-GH1983\P.6, Bullard, 3/14/13, which read:
Page 1, line 1, following "procedures;":
Insert "relating to voter registration;"
Page 2, following line 3:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 3. AS 15.07.050(a) is amended to read:
(a) Registration may be made
(1) in person before a registration
official or through a voter registration agency;
(2) by another individual on behalf of the
voter if the voter has executed a written general
power of attorney or a written special power of
attorney authorizing that other individual to register
the voter;
(3) by mail; [OR]
(4) online; or
(5) by facsimile transmission, scanning, or
other [ANOTHER] method of electronic transmission that
the director approves.
* Sec. 4. AS 15.07.055(e) is amended to read:
(e) The director shall enter into an agreement
with the Department of Administration and the
Department of Revenue to match identifying information
provided by a voter who initially registers by mail,
online, or by facsimile or other electronic
transmission approved by the director under
AS 15.07.050 with existing identification records
(1) maintained by the administrative
component of the Department of Administration that
administers motor vehicle and driver's license laws
and by the administrative component of the Department
of Revenue that administers the permanent fund
dividend laws; and
(2) bearing the same identifying number,
name, and date of birth provided on the registration.
* Sec. 5. AS 15.07.060(e) is amended to read:
(e) For an applicant requesting initial
registration by mail, online, or by facsimile or other
electronic transmission approved by the director under
AS 15.07.050, the director shall verify the
information provided in compliance with (a)(2) and (3)
of this section through state agency records described
in AS 15.07.055(e). If the applicant cannot comply
with the requirement of (a)(2) of this section because
the applicant has not been issued any of the listed
numbers, the applicant may instead submit a copy of
one of the following forms of identification: a
driver's license, state identification card, current
and valid photo identification, birth certificate,
passport, or hunting or fishing license.
* Sec. 6. AS 15.07.070(b) is amended to read:
(b) To register by mail or by facsimile,
scanning, or other electronic transmission approved by
the director under AS 15.07.050, the director, the
area election supervisor, or a voter registration
agency shall furnish, at no cost to the voter, forms
prepared by the director on which the registration
information required under AS 15.07.060 shall be
inserted by the voter, by a person on behalf of the
voter if that person is designated to act on behalf of
the voter in a power of attorney, or by a person on
behalf of the voter if the voter is physically
incapacitated. For registration online under
AS 15.07.050(a)(4), the director shall provide an
electronic version of the forms on the Internet
website of the division. The director may require
proof of identification of the applicant as required
by regulations adopted by the director under AS 44.62
(Administrative Procedure Act). Upon receipt and
approval of the completed registration forms, the
director or the election supervisor shall forward to
the voter an acknowledgment, and the voter's name
shall immediately be placed on the master register. If
the registration is denied, the voter shall
immediately be informed in writing that registration
was denied and the reason for denial. When identifying
information has been provided by the voter as required
by this chapter, the election supervisor shall forward
to the voter a registration card.
* Sec. 7. AS 15.07.070(c) is amended to read:
(c) The names of persons submitting completed
registration forms by mail that are postmarked at
least 30 days before the next election, or submitting
completed registration forms online or by facsimile or
other electronic transmission approved by the director
under AS 15.07.050 that are received at least 30 days
before the next election, shall be placed on the
official registration list for that election. If a
registration form received by mail less than 30 days
before an election does not have a legible and dated
postmark, the name of the person submitting the form
shall be placed on the official registration list for
that election if the form was signed and dated by the
person at least 30 days before the election and if the
form is received by the director or election
supervisor at least 25 days before the election. The
name of a person submitting a completed registration
form by mail, online, or by facsimile or other
electronic transmission that does not meet the
applicable requirements of this subsection may not be
placed on the official registration list for that
election but shall be placed on the master register
after that election.
* Sec. 8. AS 15.07.070(f) is amended to read:
(f) Incomplete or inaccurate registration forms
may not be accepted. A person who submitted an
incomplete or inaccurate registration form may
register by reexecuting and resubmitting a
registration form in person, by mail, online, or by
facsimile or other electronic transmission approved by
the director under AS 15.07.050. The requirements of
(c) or (d) of this section apply to a registration
form resubmitted under this subsection."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 4, following line 5:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 14. AS 15.15.225(b) is amended to read:
(b) An election official may waive the
identification requirement if the election official
knows the identity of the voter. The identification
requirement may not be waived for voters who are
first-time voters who initially registered by mail,
online, or by facsimile or other electronic
transmission approved by the director under
AS 15.07.050, and did not provide identification as
required in AS 15.07.060."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 5, following line 17:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 19. AS 15.20.081(f) is amended to read:
(f) The director shall require a voter casting
an absentee ballot by mail to provide proof of
identification or other information to aid in the
establishment of the voter's identity as prescribed by
regulations adopted under AS 44.62 (Administrative
Procedure Act). If the voter is a first-time voter who
initially registered by mail, online, or by facsimile
or other electronic transmission approved by the
director under AS 15.07.050 and has not met the
identification requirements set out in AS 15.07.060,
the voter must provide one of the following forms of
proof of identification:
(1) a copy of a driver's license, state
identification card, current and valid photo
identification, birth certificate, passport, or
hunting or fishing license; or
(2) a copy of a current utility bill, bank
statement, paycheck, government check, or other
government document; an item provided under this
paragraph must show the name and current address of
the voter."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 5, following line 29:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 21. AS 15.20.203(b) is amended to read:
(b) An absentee ballot may not be counted if
(1) the voter has failed to properly
execute the certificate;
(2) an official or the witnesses authorized
by law to attest the voter's certificate fail to
execute the certificate, except that an absentee
ballot cast in person and accepted by an absentee
voting official or election supervisor may be counted
despite failure of the absentee voting official or
election supervisor to properly sign and date the
voter's certificate as attesting official as required
under AS 15.20.061(c);
(3) the ballot is not attested on or before
the date of the election;
(4) the ballot, if postmarked, is not
postmarked on or before the date of the election;
(5) after the day of election, the ballot
was delivered by a means other than mail; or
(6) the voter voted
(A) in person and is a
(i) first-time voter who initially
registered by mail, online, or by facsimile or other
electronic transmission approved by the director under
AS 15.07.050, has not provided the identification
required by AS 15.15.225(a), was not eligible for
waiver of the identification requirement under
AS 15.15.225(b), and has not provided the identifiers
required in AS 15.07.060(a)(2) and (3) that can be
verified through state agency records described in
AS 15.07.055(e); or
(ii) voter other than one described in (i)
of this subparagraph, did not provide identification
described in AS 15.15.225(a), was not personally known
by the election official, and has not provided the
identifiers required in AS 15.07.060(a)(2) and (3); or
(B) by mail, online, or electronic
transmission, is a first-time voter who initially
registered by mail or by facsimile or other electronic
transmission approved by the director under
AS 15.07.050 to vote, has not met the identification
requirements set out in AS 15.07.060, and does not
submit with the ballot a copy of a
(i) driver's license, state identification
card, current and valid photo identification, birth
certificate, passport, or hunting or fishing license;
or
(ii) current utility bill, bank statement,
paycheck, government check, or other government
document; an item described in this sub-subparagraph
must show the name and current address of the voter."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 6, following line 18:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 24. AS 15.20.207(b) is amended to read:
(b) A questioned ballot may not be counted if
the voter
(1) has failed to properly execute the
certificate;
(2) is a first-time voter who initially
registered by mail, online, or by facsimile or other
electronic transmission approved by the director under
AS 15.07.050, has not provided the identification
required by AS 15.15.225(a), was not eligible for
waiver of the identification requirement under
AS 15.15.225(b), and has not provided the identifiers
required in AS 15.07.060(a)(2) and (3) that can be
verified through state agency records described in
AS 15.07.055(e); or
(3) is a voter other than one described in
(2) of this subsection, did not provide identification
described in AS 15.15.225(a), was not personally known
by the election official, and has not provided the
identifiers required in AS 15.07.060(a)(2) and (3)."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
CHAIR KELLER objected.
2:24:46 PM
TED MADSEN, Staff, Representative Gruenberg, Alaska State
Legislature, explained that Amendment 5 would allow Alaskan
citizens to register to vote online and would amend a number of
provisions in Title 15. According to the National Conference of
State Legislatures (NCSL), 15 states have already adopted online
voter registration and another 14 have similar legislation
pending. He noted that Arizona was the first state to adopt
online voter registration in 2002, and it has resulted in a cost
savings according to a Pew Center on the States study. The
study, which focused on Arizona and Washington, found paper
voter registration cost $.83 [per ballot] to process whereas
online voter registration cost $.03 [per ballot]. Mr. Madsen
highlighted that online voter registration is a
bipartisan/nonpartisan cost savings measure that also speeds the
process by which citizens are allowed to register to vote.
2:26:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT inquired as to the cost of implementing
the program as outlined in Amendment 5 and inquired as to
whether there is a fiscal note.
MR. MADSEN responded that he doesn't have a fiscal note for the
amendment.
2:27:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT characterized the proposal in Amendment 5
as a huge policy change, which he would oppose due to the
security aspect of it. There is a lot of potential for fraud
via the online voting system. He informed the committee that
the National Institute of Standards and Technology has advised
voting against online voting. He announced that he will be
voting against Amendment 5.
CHAIR KELLER expressed disfavor with Amendment 5, which is
lengthy and extensively changes the title to include
registration and procedures that aren't included in the current
bill put forth by the Division of Elections. He then requested
that Representative Gruenberg withdraw Amendment 5 and introduce
the concepts it embodies in another bill instead.
2:29:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG announced that he will not withdraw
Amendment 5.
2:31:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG inquired as to the cost of the proposal
embodied in Amendment 5.
MS. FENUMIAI said she didn't have an estimate of the cost at
this time. In further response to Representative Gruenberg, Ms.
Fenumiai said that she did not know of any true voter fraud
issues.
2:31:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT opined that the initial registration is a
bit different than voter fraud.
2:32:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT offered that although she is in favor of
electronic voting and the state should move toward that, this
bill isn't the appropriate vehicle. Furthermore, it's a larger
issue than the House Judiciary Standing Committee can discuss.
She then encouraged the amendment sponsor to introduce a bill
about Internet voting.
2:32:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER agreed with Representative Millett's
comments and expressed the desire to have the confidence that
the concerns by Representative Pruitt are addressed, perhaps in
a pilot program and a separate bill.
2:33:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew Amendment 5.
2:34:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report CSHB 104, Version 28-
GH1983\P, Bullard, 3/12/13, as amended [on 3/15/13 and today],
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, [new] CSHB
104(JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing
Committee.
HB 140-NOTICE FOR REGULATION ADOPTION
2:35:14 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 140, "An Act relating to the information that
must be included with certain notices provided for the proposed
adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation."
2:35:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LORA REINBOLD, Alaska State Legislature,
explained that HB 140 is intended to address what many consider
to be too many regulations. The purpose of HB 140 is to make
the government and the regulators aware of the impacts of the
regulations. She opined that government agencies and regulators
need to work collaboratively with businesses and communities and
be reminded that they work for the people. Representative
Reinbold then paraphrased from the written sponsor statement,
which read:
Under current law, state agencies that propose changes
to the Alaska Administrative Code, our state
regulations, are required to disclose certain
information about the regulation, including the reason
for the proposed action, costs of implementation of
the regulation to the adopting agency and the origin
of the proposed regulation.
To provide better information about regulations that
may significantly affect private individuals and
businesses, other state agencies and local
governments, House Bill 140 requires that regulation
notices include information about estimated costs
beyond those to the agency. In view of the increasing
reach of the Washington D.C. into Alaska's affairs,
the bill also requires that when the federal
government is the reason for the regulation, the exact
federal law, executive order or decision be identified
in order for Alaskans to better understand government
actions that affect their businesses and lives.
Open government is a great American and Alaskan
tradition. I respectfully request your support for
House Bill 140.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD then highlighted the letters of support
from the Council of Alaska Producers and the National Federation
of Independent Business/Alaska in members' packets and stated
that there are more letters of support to come.
2:40:45 PM
ROBERT PEARSON, Staff, Representative Lora Reinbold, Alaska
State Legislature, paraphrased from the following sectional
analysis, which read:
Sec. 1 Short title: "Regulation Impact Transparency
Act." House Bill 140 will require additional
information in state agency notices of proposed
regulations, specifically to increase transparency of
the proposal's fiscal impacts, including to the
private sector.
Sec. 2 Under current Alaska Statutes 44.62.190(d) the
agency is required to provide a "reason for the
proposed action." If the reason given is "federal," HB
140 will require identification of the federal action
that is the reason for the proposed regulation. It
also adds a requirement to estimate compliance costs
to private persons (including private businesses),
other state agencies and municipalities.
Sec. 3 Applicability: applies to regulations proposals
noticed on or after the effective date of this act.
MR. PEARSON then directed attention to the document entitled
"What does HB 140 do?" and noted that it's a notice of proposed
regulations. Page 2 of this document is what's known as
additional regulations notice information under AS 44.62.190(d),
which is the only part of the law that will be changed by
HB 140. As specified on page 2, Section 2(1) will require the
state agency supply a reference/citation of the federal law or
other action that could include anything from an executive order
to the combined federal register. The only other change HB 140
would make is to insert Section 2(3)(A),(B), and (C), which
would require the estimated costs to private individuals, other
state agencies, and municipalities will be included in the
regulation notice.
2:44:06 PM
MR. PEARSON pointed out that the fiscal note for HB 140 is
indeterminate and highlighted the fiscal note analysis language
that says, "... more detail is needed as to whether the estimate
required is a general estimate of impacts for a group or set of
municipalities or for each individual municipality, etc." He
offered his belief that the language in HB 140 is clear when it
refers to an estimate of annual costs. He acknowledged,
however, that it isn't a number encompassing every person in the
state who may be impacted by the regulations but rather is
simply an estimate of costs to the impacted entities. The
agencies should be able to make an estimate based on their
knowledge of the regulations and community to which the
regulations apply.
2:45:57 PM
CHAIR KELLER expressed favor with HB 140.
2:46:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she likes the concept of HB 140.
She then asked who would be responsible for making the estimates
of annual costs. If the Office of Management & Budget is
responsible for making the estimates, she surmised that the
workload would increase significantly or an economist would have
to be added to each department.
MR. PEARSON answered that the sponsor doesn't anticipate major
personnel requirements for this change. He noted that the
regulations notice always has a signature at the bottom of a
regulations specialist, assistant to the commissioner who, in
effect, is the one who signs the estimate. However, in each
department that promulgates regulations, there are those who
have expertise in the area being regulated. The regulation
specialist would ask for the necessary information to provide
the estimate and put it in the notice. The thought is that the
departments know the regulated community and who they're
regulating and should know to some degree when they propose a
regulation whether it will cost the public or other state
agencies and include that information.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX expressed interest in hearing whether
departmental commissioners would anticipate an increase in
staff.
MR. PEARSON deferred to others who may be better able to address
that question.
2:49:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD relayed that she is willing to work with
DOL to develop language that would make this legislation
possible. She then emphasized the need for the state to
identify from where the regulations are coming and do long-term
thinking. She mentioned that as chair of the Administrative
Regulation Review Committee she plans to hold hearings on this
issue, and thus there should be more information forthcoming.
CHAIR KELLER expressed interest in hearing from the Alaska
Municipal League (AML), particularly since the legislature does
impose mandates that cost [municipalities] money.
2:50:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired which department promulgates the
most regulations.
MR. PEARSON answered that the Department of Commerce, Community
& Economic Development (DCCED), with its licensing and
professional boards, is the largest promulgator of regulations.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested that the commissioner of DCCED
be invited to speak at the next hearing on HB 140.
2:51:53 PM
CATHY P. FOERSTER, Chair, Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation
Commission (AOGCC), Department of Administration, provided the
following testimony:
From the perspective of the AOGCC HB 140 is
problematic in its current wording. The commission
does not wish to be in the position of conceding that
federal law or a federal court decision does or even
could require us to promulgate regulations. And I
think that statement speaks for itself, it sets a
state's rights precedent that is counter to where we
[AOGCC] sit; we make regulations based on what's best
for the citizens of Alaska, based on what we do here
in Alaska.
MS. FOERSTER then expressed AOGCC's concern that it doesn't have
the time, resources, or expertise to make a determination as to
the economic impact on all the listed entities. The AOGCC, she
highlighted, has a process in place such that during the
promulgation of regulations ample public notice of the proposed
regulations, additions, or changes is included. Furthermore,
hearings on those changes are noticed and written comments
before or during the hearing are welcome as is testimony at the
hearing itself. She noted that generally lots of comments,
including the parties' estimates of the economic impact of any
regulation changes are received. The process, she opined, works
really well, even though the AOGCC doesn't have financial
experts. From conversations with DOL, Ms. Foerster related her
understanding that with a bit of collaborative "tweeking"
AOGCC's concerns with HB 140 can be addressed. Ms. Foerster
clarified that she isn't stating opposition to HB 140 but rather
believes it should receive the thought and attention necessary
to ensure that it says what is desired.
2:55:01 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that HB 140 would be set aside.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD related her expectation for push back
from the government as it's not accustomed to "looking down the
road." Therefore, Representative Reinbold said she is willing
to work with the departments in hopes that they are willing to
partner with industry in order to move the state forward toward
the goal of a long-term sustainable future for the state.
2:56:13 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:56 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 140 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 ver. N.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 Fiscal Note-Office of Management & Budget.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 Supporting Document-What Does HB 140 Do.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 Letter of Support-NFIB.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 Letter of Support-Council of Alaska Producers.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| CS HB 57 ver. O.pdf |
HJUD 3/18/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |