04/05/2013 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR10 | |
| HB173 | |
| HJR10 | |
| HB104 | |
| HB3 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 3 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 5, 2013
1:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Charisse Millett
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 10
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
creating a transportation infrastructure fund.
- MOVED CSHJR 10(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 173
"An Act defining 'medically necessary abortion' for purposes of
making payments under the state Medicaid program."
- MOVED HB 173 OUT OF COMMITTEE
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(2D JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 3
"An Act relating to voter identification at the polls; and
relating to the counting of absentee and questioned ballots."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HJR 10
SHORT TITLE: CONST. AM: TRANSPORTATION FUND
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) P.WILSON
02/15/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/15/13 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
02/26/13 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/26/13 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/26/13 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
02/27/13 (H) TRA RPT 6DP
02/27/13 (H) DP: LYNN, FEIGE, ISAACSON, GATTIS,
KREISS-TOMKINS, P.WILSON
04/03/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/03/13 (H) Heard & Held
04/03/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/05/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 173
SHORT TITLE: RESTRICT MEDICAID PAYMENT FOR ABORTIONS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) LEDOUX
03/15/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/15/13 (H) JUD, FIN
03/29/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/29/13 (H) Heard & Held
03/29/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/01/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/01/13 (H) Heard & Held
04/01/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/03/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/03/13 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
04/05/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
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
03/18/13 (H) Moved New CSHB 104(JUD) Out of
Committee
03/18/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/20/13 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 6DP 1AM
03/20/13 (H) DP: MILLETT, PRUITT, FOSTER, LEDOUX,
LYNN, KELLER
03/20/13 (H) AM: GRUENBERG
03/22/13 (H) RETURNED TO JUD COMMITTEE
04/05/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 3
SHORT TITLE: PHOTO IDENTIFICATION VOTING REQUIREMENT
SPONSOR(S): LYNN, KELLER
01/16/13 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/13
01/16/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/13 (H) STA, JUD
02/21/13 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/21/13 (H) Heard & Held
02/21/13 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/14/13 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/14/13 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/14/13 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/14/13 (H) STA RPT 2DP 1DNP 1NR 2AM
03/14/13 (H) DP: KELLER, LYNN
03/14/13 (H) DNP: KREISS-TOMKINS
03/14/13 (H) NR: GATTIS
03/14/13 (H) AM: HUGHES, ISAACSON
04/01/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/01/13 (H) Heard & Held
04/01/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/05/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director
Central Office
Division of Elections
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments and responded to
questions during discussion of proposed amendments to CSHB
104(JUD).
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Executive Director
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)
Department of Administration (DOA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during discussion of
proposed amendments to CSHB 104(JUD).
FORREST WOLFE, Staff
Representative Bob Lynn
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Assisted with the presentation of HB 3 on
behalf of Representative Lynn, one of the bill's joint prime
sponsors.
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director
Central Office
Division of Elections
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions and provided
comments during discussion of HB 3.
WILLIAM MARTIN, Grand President
Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Asked the committee to not let HB 3 become
law.
MARY GRAHAM
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments as an election official,
and said she is not in favor of HB 3.
FREDA WESTMAN, Grand President
Alaska Native Sisterhood (ANS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with HB 3 and the hope
that it would not pass.
BETH McEWEN, Member
Alaska Association of Municipal Clerks (AAMC)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments in opposition to HB 3 and
suggested changes to it.
JAN TRIGG, President
Camp 70 Glacier Valley
Alaska Native Sisterhood (ANS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the committee to vote "Do Not Pass"
on HB 3.
TRAVIS LEWIS, Vice President
Alaskans for Alaska
Elfin Cove, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 3.
JOSHUA DECKER, Staff Attorney
American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska (ACLU of Alaska)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with HB 3, and urged the
committee not to pass it.
NATASHA SINGH, General Counsel
Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC)
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with HB 3.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:05:21 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. Representatives Keller, Foster,
LeDoux, and Lynn were present at the call to order.
Representatives Gruenberg and Pruitt arrived as the meeting was
in progress.
HJR 10 - CONST. AM: TRANSPORTATION FUND
1:06:11 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 10, Proposing amendments to the
Constitution of the State of Alaska creating a transportation
infrastructure fund. [Before the committee was HJR 10, as
amended on 4/3/13.]
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER said he'd received a number of
communications from people in rural Alaska supporting HJR 10.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX characterized [HJR 10's proposed changes]
as a great idea, and offered her belief that [they would result
in] something that's really needed for both urban and rural
Alaska.
CHAIR KELLER expressed favor with allowing the people to vote on
HJR 10's proposed changes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would be voting against HJR 10
but would not oppose its movement from committee.
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER mentioned that an affirmative vote by two-
thirds of the membership in each body would be required to place
HJR 10's proposed changes to the Alaska State Constitution on
the ballot, whereupon only a simple majority vote would be
required for those changes to then be adopted.
1:08:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report HJR 10, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHJR 10(JUD) was
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
[The committee returned to the hearing on HJR 10 later in the
meeting.]
The committee took an at-ease from 1:09 p.m. to 1:11 p.m.
HB 173 - RESTRICT MEDICAID PAYMENT FOR ABORTIONS
1:11:03 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
[HOUSE BILL NO. 173, "An Act defining 'medically necessary
abortion' for purposes of making payments under the state
Medicaid program."]
CHAIR KELLER noted that public testimony on and committee
discussion of HB 173 had already occurred.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, mentioning that he wouldn't be
offering any amendments [at this time,] relayed that he opposes
passage of HB 173 and would be voting "No" on it.
1:12:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report HB 173 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG reiterated his opposition to the
motion.
CHAIR KELLER objected to the motion, recapped what had occurred
during the meeting thus far, and removed his objection.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG again relayed that he objects to the
motion.
1:14:45 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, LeDoux,
Lynn, and Keller voted in favor of reporting HB 173 out of
committee. Representatives Gruenberg and Foster voted against
it. Therefore, HB 173 was reported from the House Judiciary
Standing Committee by a vote of 4-2.
The committee took an at-ease from 1:15 p.m. to 1:20 p.m.
HJR 10 - CONST. AM: TRANSPORTATION FUND
1:20:04 PM
CHAIR KELLER [announced that as the next order of business, the
committee would return to the hearing on HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION
NO. 10, Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of
Alaska creating a transportation infrastructure fund.]
[CSHJR 10(JUD) had been reported from committee earlier in the
meeting.]
1:20:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT made a motion that the committee rescind
its action in reporting CSHJR 10(JUD) from committee.
CHAIR KELLER objected.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that someone
else would have to make the motion.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT withdrew his motion.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion that the committee
rescind its action in reporting CSHJR 10(JUD) from committee.
There being no objection, HJR 10, as amended, was again before
the committee.
1:20:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN again moved to report HJR 10, as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHJR
10(JUD) was again reported from the House Judiciary Standing
Committee.
CHAIR KELLER mentioned that Representative Pruitt would now be
able to [sign the committee report] on HJR 10.
HB 104 - ELECTION PROCEDURES; REAA ADVISORY BOARDS
1:21:31 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(JUD).]
CHAIR KELLER noted that the bill, as amended, was previously
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee, but was
then referred back to the committee for additional amendments.
CHAIR KELLER turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Lynn.
1:23:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT made a motion to adopt Amendment 1,
labeled 28-GH1983\R.5, Bullard, 4/4/13, which read:
Page 7, line 19:
Delete "second"
Insert "third"
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT explained that Amendment 1's proposed
change to Section 19 of the bill was requested because of a
concern that one of the unintended consequences of that
section's proposal to move the date of the primary election from
the fourth Tuesday in August to the second Tuesday in August
would be that ballot initiatives would be voted upon in the
general election rather than in the primary election. This was
not the intent, however, and so Amendment 1 would address this
concern by instead proposing to move the date of the primary
election to the third Tuesday in August.
1:24:14 PM
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director, Central Office, Division of Elections,
Office of the Lieutenant Governor, concurred that Amendment 1's
proposed change would ensure that ballot initiatives would still
be voted upon in the primary election. In response to questions
and comments, she explained that the division had initially
proposed moving the date of the primary election to the second
Tuesday in August for administrative purposes - seeking two
extra weeks in which to prepare ballots for the general election
- but had not given any consideration to the impact the proposed
change would have on ballot initiatives; assured the committee
that being given even just the one extra week between the
primary election and the general election as proposed under
Amendment 1 would still be helpful to the division; relayed that
statistically, a lot more people vote in the general election
than in the primary election; and acknowledged therefore that
retaining Section 19 as currently written, resulting in ballot
initiatives being voted upon in the general election, could
possibly also result in more people voting on ballot
initiatives.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT shared his belief, however, that only when
voted upon during a primary election is a ballot initiative's
proposed change comprehended by the voters.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX expressed a preference for addressing at
some other time the policy question of whether to require ballot
initiatives to be voted upon in the general election. She
therefore indicated support for Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG - offering his recollection that up
until just a few years ago, ballot initiatives were voted upon
in the general election - indicated a preference for addressing
the policy question now, particularly given that [not adopting
Amendment 1] could result in more people voting on ballot
initiatives, because a lot more people vote in the general
election. He opined that voters in the general election are
indeed capable of comprehending a ballot initiative's proposed
change.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, Foster,
LeDoux, and Lynn voted in favor of adopting Amendment 1.
Representative Gruenberg voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote of 4-1.
1:40:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT made a motion to adopt Amendment 2,
labeled 28-GH1983\R.4, Bullard, 4/1/13, which read:
Page 1, line 2, following "expenditures;":
Insert "relating to identification requirements
for a communication paid for by a political party;"
Page 3, following line 30:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 7. AS 15.13.090(a) is amended to read:
(a) All communications shall be clearly
identified by the words "paid for by" followed by the
name and address of the person paying for the
communication. In addition, except as provided by (d)
of this section, a person shall clearly
(1) provide the person's address or the
person's principal place of business;
(2) for a person other than an individual
or candidate, include
(A) the name and title of the person's
principal officer;
(B) a statement from the principal officer
approving the communication; and
(C) unless the person is a political party,
identification of the name and city and state of
residence or principal place of business, as
applicable, of each of the person's three largest
contributors under AS 15.13.040(e)(5), if any, during
the 12-month period before the date of the
communication.
* Sec. 8. AS 15.13.090(c) is amended to read:
(c) To satisfy the requirements of (a)(1) of
this section and, if applicable, (a)(2)(C) of this
section, a communication that includes a print or
video component must have the following statement or
statements placed in the communication so as to be
easily discernible; the second statement is not
required if the person paying for the communication
has no contributors or is a political party:
This communication was paid for by (person's name and
city and state of principal place of business). The
top contributors of (person's name) are (the name and
city and state of residence or principal place of
business, as applicable, of the largest contributors
to the person under AS 15.13.090(a)(2)(C)).
* Sec. 9. AS 15.13.090(d) is amended to read:
(d) Notwithstanding the requirements of (a) of
this section, in a communication transmitted through
radio or other audio media and in a communication that
includes an audio component, the following statements
must be read in a manner that is easily heard; the
second statement is not required if the person paying
for the communication has no contributors or is a
political party:
This communication was paid for by (person's name).
The top contributors of (person's name) are (the name
of the largest contributors to the person under
AS 15.13.090(a)(2)(C))."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT indicated that Amendment 2 would exempt
political parties from the existing statutory requirement [in AS
15.13.090] that when paying for a communication, the three
largest contributors shall be identified in the communication.
He offered his understanding that the top two political parties
in Alaska aren't complying with that statutory requirement
anyway, and opined that they shouldn't have to, since the
political party paying for a communication would still be
identified.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed disfavor with Amendment 2's
proposed change because it would result in less disclosure;
Amendment 2 would allow political parties to conceal information
from the voters.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT disagreed.
1:48:03 PM
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC), Department of Administration (DOA), in
response to questions, offered his understanding that
Amendment 2 would result in political parties being exempted
from the existing statutory requirement that when paying for a
communication, the three largest contributors shall be
identified in the communication. The political party paying for
such a communication, however, would still be statutorily
required to be identified.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, mentioning that he would be conducting
further research, relayed that he would be voting against the
adoption of Amendment 2 at this time.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Lynn, Pruitt,
Foster, and LeDoux voted in favor of adopting Amendment 2.
Representative Gruenberg voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 2 was adopted by a vote of 4-1.
VICE CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 104.
1:52:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to report CSHB 104(JUD), as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection,
CSHB 104(2d JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing
Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 1:53 p.m. to 1:58 p.m.
HB 3 - PHOTO IDENTIFICATION VOTING REQUIREMENT
1:58:03 PM
VICE CHAIR LYNN announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 3, "An Act relating to voter identification at
the polls; and relating to the counting of absentee and
questioned ballots."
VICE CHAIR LYNN turned the gavel over to Representative Pruitt.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN, as a joint prime sponsor, assured the
committee that nothing in HB 3 would prevent a person who is
registered to vote and who is motivated to vote, from voting.
Under HB 3, people voting in person would be required to present
one form of photographic ("photo") identification (ID), or two
forms of [non-photo ID,] in order to vote. The bill also
provides an exemption for voters who can instead have their
identity verified by two election officials who know them, and,
if unable to comply with HB 3's identification requirements, or
qualify for the exemption it provides, voters may instead cast
provisional or questioned ballots. He offered his belief that
none of HB 3's requirements would be too onerous.
2:00:50 PM
FORREST WOLFE, Staff, Representative Bob Lynn, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Lynn, one of HB 3's
joint prime sponsors, in addition to reiterating Representative
Lynn's explanation of HB 3, characterized the bill as a
proactive measure intended to secure Alaska's elections while
respecting Alaska's unique voting population, noted that close
elections are common in Alaska, and opined, therefore, that even
one case of voter fraud is one case too many. He provided some
examples of the types of photo ID and non-photo ID that would be
acceptable under the bill's proposed AS 15.15.225(a); pointed
out that its proposed AS 15.15.225(a)(2)(D) reads in part, "a
valid identification card, license, or permit issued by any
branch, department, agency, or entity of the United States
government or the state"; and offered his belief that voters who
receive a permanent fund dividend (PFD), public assistance, or
services from the federal Indian Health Service (IHS) would all
be able to comply with the requirements of the bill. He, too,
noted that the bill provides an exemption for a voter who can
instead have his/her identity verified by two election
officials, and offered his understanding that most voters in the
Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta (Y-K Delta) already use the existing
exemption under current law wherein a voter's identity need only
be verified by one election official.
MR. WOLF explained that in addition to requiring two election
officials to verify the identity of any voter using the
exemption, under the bill's proposed AS 15.15.225(b), those two
election officials must sign the voter registration list next to
the voter's name. The election officials could then be held
responsible for any situations in which a fraudulent vote is
cast. He, too, also noted that if a voter is unable to comply
with HB 3's identification requirements, or qualify for the
exemption it provides, he/she may instead cast a provisional or
questioned ballot, which, he opined, are easy to fill out and
count just as much as any other ballot. A copy of the form
titled, "Questioned Ballot Oath & Affidavit Envelope" is
included in members' packets. In conclusion, he said HB 3 seeks
to do nothing more than make Alaska's elections more secure, and
indicated that the sponsor feels that the bill would do just
that without disenfranchising any voters. In response to a
question, he shared his understanding of what's required, in
terms of providing acceptable identification information, of
someone casting a questioned ballot.
2:05:25 PM
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director, Central Office, Division of Elections,
Office of the Lieutenant Governor, added that for questioned
ballots, the identification information provided on the envelope
by voters who have previously registered to vote is compared to
the identification information already listed in the voter
registration system for those voters. In response to comments
and further questions, she acknowledged that in some voting
precincts, finding enough election officials to even keep a
polling place open continues to be difficult; that in polling
places wherein only one election official is present, voters who
are unable to provide either one form of photo ID or two forms
of non-photo ID would have to cast a questioned ballot; and that
depending on the particular voting precinct, a lack of enough
election officials could also impact voters who vote absentee in
person, which is what voters are required to do when there are
too few election officials available in a particular voting
precinct. She offered her understanding that HB 3's proposed
changes would apply to all voters except those who vote absentee
by mail.
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER expressed concern that the division's
ongoing difficulty in finding enough election officials could
result in problems for some voters in rural Alaska because of
the bill's proposed requirement that two election officials
verify the identity of voters unable to present either one form
of photo ID or two forms of non-photo ID, particularly given
that some such voters don't have any of the identification
documents listed under the bill or any way of obtaining them in
a timely fashion - if at all. And given that close elections
are common in Alaska, it would not be a good thing for a voter
in rural Alaska to have difficulties voting as a result of the
bill's requirements; any such difficulties, regardless that they
might at some point be overcome, could have a chilling effect on
voters in rural Alaska. For voters in rural Alaska, the
identification requirements under current law are sufficient to
prevent instances of voter fraud in Alaska.
MR. WOLFE shared his belief that HB 3's proposed identification
requirements would not present difficulties for voters in rural
Alaska, because of the exemption provided for those who can
instead have their identity verified by two election officials.
Referring to existing law's provision stipulating that a copy of
a current utility bill would suffice for identification
purposes, he offered a hypothetical example of a situation in
which voter fraud could be perpetrated under that existing
provision. The bill's proposed changes are intended to address
such situations, and so as long as the identification provided
by the voter is an official document issued by a branch of
government, it would be acceptable under the bill. He also
offered his belief that HB 3 - via its stipulation that two
election officials must verify the identity of a voter who
cannot provide either one form of photo ID or two forms of non-
photo ID - would address instances of voter fraud perpetrated by
election officials, such as has occurred in [another state]; and
reiterated his understanding that under the bill, election
officials could be held responsible for any instances of voter
fraud perpetrated by a voter whose identity they verified.
2:28:40 PM
WILLIAM MARTIN, Grand President, Alaska Native Brotherhood
(ANB), explained that the ANB feels that HB 3 would not be good
for Alaska Natives because it could preclude a lot of them from
exercising their right to vote. Many of a certain age don't
have "ID cards." Such cards aren't required for purposes of
receiving healthcare at a SouthEast Alaska Regional Health
Consortium (SEARHC) [clinic], or voting in a tribal election.
Furthermore, tribal ID cards don't have photographs, and people
in the villages all know each other. In conclusion, he asked
the committee to not let HB 3 pass, because it would hinder
people's ability to vote, and putting in place a bill that would
keep people from exercising their right to vote would simply be
wrong.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed, adding that he doesn't want to
see anyone lose his/her right to vote.
MR. MARTIN, in response to comments, pointed out that in every
election he has voted in, not even one of the five or six
election officials working at his polling place knew who he was,
and thus it's not necessarily true that a voter lacking either
one form of photo ID or two forms of non-photo ID could simply
have election officials verify his/her identity.
2:32:40 PM
MARY GRAHAM, noting that she now serves as an election official,
said she is not in favor of HB 3, and doesn't think that
Alaska's current election procedures create problems. She added
that she is a little worried about assertions that as an
election official, she would collude with someone to commit
voter fraud. With regard to the claim that a voter who is
unable to comply with HB 3's identification requirements or
qualify for the exemption it provides could instead simply cast
a [provisional or] questioned ballot, she offered the analogy of
being sent to the principal's office simply for forgetting one's
pencil. Casting a questioned ballot is not like casting a
regular ballot - casting a questioned ballot requires more steps
of both the voter and election officials, and thus the bill is
essentially singling out such voters. Offering an example
wherein she, as just one election official, was able to verify
the identity of a voter who'd come to vote during a lunch break
from work but couldn't find her photo ID, Ms. Graham said she
doesn't think it's necessary to require two election officials
to verify the identity of a voter, and thinks that the current
system works very well as is, and that the concept behind the
bill is being proposed by outside interests.
2:34:57 PM
FREDA WESTMAN, Grand President, Alaska Native Sisterhood (ANS),
referring to the right to vote as one of the greatest equalizers
in America, predicted that HB 3 would surely disenfranchise
Alaska's Native voters, regardless of assurances that that's not
the bill's intention, because there are those who simply won't
vote a questioned ballot. Having to vote a questioned ballot
puts one in a different class of citizens. Many Alaska Natives
live in rural Alaska and therefore simply don't have access to
photo IDs, and the bill's proposed changes would require that
such persons cast a questioned ballot, thereby placing them in a
different class of voters. Nobody wants to cast a questioned
ballot. Pointing out that she votes in every election and
always uses her voter registration card, she questioned why she
should need anything else to prove her identity. In conclusion,
she shared her hope that the committee would vote "Do Not Pass"
on HB 3, and again predicted that HB 3 would surely
disenfranchise the people she represents.
MS. WESTMAN, in response to comments and questions, relayed that
although she's applied for an identification card through her
local tribal office, the bill itself doesn't clarify what
constitutes a tribe, even though what does constitute a tribe
isn't clear to a lot of people; for example, she's heard people
refer to Alaska Native corporations as tribes. Furthermore,
obtaining a tribal ID card is going to be cumbersome for people
who move away from their [home] village. More to the point,
though, why should Alaska Natives be required to present a
tribal ID card in order to vote? Alaska Natives are citizens of
Alaska, and as such should not have to present a tribal ID card
- signifying simply that one is a member of the tribe - just to
vote; no one who is Caucasian would want to have to present a
card stating that they are Caucasian in order to vote.
2:41:46 PM
BETH McEWEN, Member, Alaska Association of Municipal Clerks
(AAMC), noted that members' packets contain a resolution passed
by the AAMC opposing HB 3 - Resolution No. 2013-01 - and
indicated that the AAMC has a number of concerns with the bill,
many of which have already been addressed by previous speakers.
She requested that if HB 3 is passed regardless, that it first
be amended such that only one election official would be
required to verify a voter's identity, because it's evident from
previous testimony that that is sufficient to ensure that voters
are who they say they are. Furthermore, people with certain
disabilities, because they aren't necessarily going to have a
driver's license or any of the other listed forms of photo ID,
could be required to cast a questioned ballot under HB 3 as
currently written. Her niece, for example, has Down syndrome
and uses her city bus pass for ID. The bill, she suggested,
should therefore also be amended to allow photo ID issued by a
municipality - such as a city bus pass - to be used for
identification purposes when voting. In conclusion, she
reiterated that the AAMC has passed Resolution No. 2013-01
opposing HB 3.
MS. McEWEN, in response to comments and questions, concurred
that nobody likes to vote a questioned ballot because of public
perception, and relayed that she has heard many voters say that
if they were required to vote a provisional or questioned
ballot, they would instead simply not vote.
2:47:08 PM
JAN TRIGG, President, Camp 70 Glacier Valley, Alaska Native
Sisterhood (ANS), urged the committee to vote "Do Not Pass" on
HB 3. She offered her belief that HB 3 would discriminate
against rural Alaskans, and would create an impediment to the
most basic of democratic practices. The homeless, the
homebound, returning veterans, the elderly, people of color, and
college students would all be vulnerable. Citizens in rural
Alaska are primarily Alaska Native, and HB 3 would unfairly
impact many rural Alaskans, who live in places where obtaining
photo ID may not be possible. Alaska does not have a problem
with voter fraud - Alaska's current laws are sufficient to
prevent it. There should not be more stringent requirements to
vote than there are to register to vote. It's wrong to pass
laws that would block some Alaskans from voting, that would deny
them the opportunity to participate equally in the democracy.
In conclusion, she again urged the committee to vote "Do Not
Pass" on HB 3.
2:49:35 PM
TRAVIS LEWIS, Vice President, Alaskans for Alaska, relayed that
his organization is "absolutely for" HB 3. He offered his
belief that voter fraud is occurring in Alaska, and cited some
statistics to illustrate. For example, at the time of the 2010
election, 20 year-around residents lived in Elfin Cove according
to the census, but there were 68 people registered to vote.
Numbers such as these result when non-residents - for example,
tourism-based-business owners and their seasonal employees -
come up to Alaska for the season and register to vote [based on
having a mailing address in Alaska]. Acknowledging that
obtaining identification documents could be difficult for some
Alaskans depending on where they live, he said it's hard for him
to understand nonetheless how anyone in this day and age could
be without what he termed, "proper identification," given how
often it's now required for a variety of purposes. Voting is a
sacred right that many have fought very hard for, but voter
fraud is currently being committed in Southeast Alaska by
residents of other states who just come to Alaska to work for
the season. Requiring photo ID in order to vote would be
helpful in terms of enforcing Alaska's election laws because it
would then be clear from such ID which state a person really
resides in. Mr. Lewis said he is in full support of HB 3,
adding that he would also like to see Alaska's voter-
registration laws amended such that claims of intending to
return to Alaska would no longer be sufficient to
[establish/maintain] residency for purposes of voting in Alaska
elections.
MS. FENUMIAI, in response to comments and questions, relayed
that the current number of people of voting age in Alaska is
522,853, and the current number of people registered to vote in
Alaska is 486,498.
2:59:31 PM
JOSHUA DECKER, Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union of
Alaska (ACLU of Alaska), mentioning that the ACLU of Alaska has
submitted written testimony on HB 3, stated that there are
significant constitutional concerns with the bill.
Specifically, HB 3 would violate Alaskans' constitutionally-
protected right to vote, unconstitutionally burdening voters,
particularly those who live in rural Alaska and who don't have
photo ID, which is not currently required under existing law.
As outlined in the aforementioned written testimony, HB 3 is
fatally similar to a Texas law recently invalidated by the
courts. Furthermore, because the State of Alaska doesn't
provide people with free photo ID and the bill makes no
provision for such, requiring people to present photo ID in
order to vote means that they would have to pay for those IDs
themselves, in effect resulting in them paying what he called
"an unconstitutional poll tax."
MR. DECKER said HB 3 also strangely strikes away at the best
indicia of identification, that being personal knowledge, by no
longer allowing just one election official who personally knows
the identity of a voter to waive the identifying-documentation
requirement. Voter fraud, although a serious issue, is not a
problem in Alaska; according to a letter from the Division of
Elections dated January 17, 2013, there has been only one case
[wherein a person voted under a fraudulent name, but the
underlying issue in that case was actually one of identity
theft, and the bill would not have prevented that person from
fraudulently voting because he had photo ID, albeit fraudulent].
In conclusion, he urged the committee to not pass HB 3.
3:02:23 PM
NATASHA SINGH, General Counsel, Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC),
mentioning that she is also a Stevens Village tribal court
judge, explained that voting in rural Alaska is different than
voting in urban areas of the state, and is especially different
in the small villages that make up Interior Alaska. If passed,
HB 3 has the potential to be detrimental to rural Alaskans'
ability to vote. Placing more restrictions on Alaskans will not
increase voting, and the justifications used in the Lower 48,
asserting that increasing restrictions on voting would prevent
voter fraud, do not apply in Alaska. Again, there has been only
one documented case of voter fraud in Alaska, and thus there is
no reasonable justification for adopting HB 3. At the [latest
election], voter turnout for the state as a whole was about 59
percent, and voter turnout in Anchorage's District 23, for
example, was about 64.6 percent, but voter turnout in rural
District 37, for example, was only about 46 percent. The
legislature should be very concerned with the extremely low
voter turnout by Alaska Natives in rural Alaska, and therefore
be taking steps to increase voter turnout, not decrease it.
MS. SINGH predicted that HB 3's proposed changes would likely
decrease voter turnout in rural Alaska. First, not all village
residents have ID, and while it may be very hard for those
who've never lived in a village to understand, an ID isn't
really necessary in a village - there are no banks, for example,
and everyone already knows each other. It is certainly not a
lack of motivation to vote that would cause a rural resident to
forego traveling to an urban hub just to obtain a photo ID, but
rather the fact that such travel is so expensive; for example,
it could be over $500 for a flight to Anchorage, and that's a
lot of money. Furthermore, even when a village resident does
have an ID, he/she doesn't normally carry it around in the
village, even on Election Day. Requiring two election
officials, rather than allowing just one, to waive the bill's
identifying-documentation requirement would further hinder
Alaska Natives' right to vote. For example, although most of
the villages [served by the TCC] regularly have two or more
election officials, if an event occurs that impacts an entire
village - such as a funeral - then having an adequate number of
election officials available to address waivers under the bill
is going to be problematic when the entire village goes to the
funeral; in a recent poll of just four villages, three of them
stated that requiring two election officials to verify identity
would be a burden in such situations.
3:06:18 PM
MS. SINGH said the TCC strongly believes that the right to vote
is a fundamental right of Americans and the most necessary
factor of democracy, and agree that the integrity of the voting
process needs to be protected. But it's a fallacy to believe
that citizens are discouraged from voting simply because voter
fraud exists; if Alaskans aren't voting it may simply be because
they are discouraged by the fact that their elected
representatives are actually representing outside interests
instead. For further insight, the committee should rely
strongly on the views of the Bush caucus, which represents
Alaska's rural residents and understands the reasoning behind
the TCC and other Native corporations' opposition to HB 3. And
if [the committee] fails to consider the views of the Bush
caucus, then it should at least consider the legal opinion from
Legislative Legal and Research Services regarding HB 3.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT, in response to comments offered earlier
by Mr. Lewis, paraphrased some information provided from page 5
of a Division of Election's report titled, "State of Alaska,
HAVA State Plan, 2010 Updated"; that information, a copy of
which was included in an e-mail in members' packets, read
[original punctuation provided]:
Alaska has over 488,000 registered voters. According
to the Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce
Development, the estimated voting age population in
2005 was 454,226. Alaska attributes its inflated
registration rolls to the fact that Alaska Statute
Title 15 allows a person who is temporarily out of
state to remain registered in Alaska if that person
has the "intent" to return (military and military
spouses are exempt from intent requirements). Because
of Alaska's Permanent Fund Dividend program benefits
and no state income tax, many Alaskans choose to
maintain their Alaska residency even if they currently
live outside the state.
[HB 3 was held over.]
3:08:56 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:09 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 173 Letter of Support-AK Family Medical Care.pdf |
HJUD 4/5/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| CSHB 104 (JUD) Amendment R.4.pdf |
HJUD 4/5/2013 1:00:00 PM |
HB 104 |