Legislature(2019 - 2020)DAVIS 106
05/19/2020 10:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation(s): Vote by Mail | |
| HB150 | |
| Presentation(s): Vote by Mail | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 150 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
May 19, 2020
10:22 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Zack Fields, Co-Chair (via teleconference)
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Co-Chair
Representative Grier Hopkins (via teleconference)
Representative Andi Story (via teleconference)
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Steve Thompson
Representative Sarah Vance
Representative Laddie Shaw
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Senator Lora Reinbold
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): VOTE BY MAIL
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 150
"An Act requiring state elections and local elections that the
state is responsible for conducting to be conducted by mail;
requiring certain vote-by-mail ballots and election materials to
be provided in certain written languages other than English;
establishing an online ballot tracking and registration
verification system; establishing voting centers and ballot drop
boxes; eliminating the use of polling places, absentee ballots,
and questioned ballots in certain elections; and providing for
an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 150
SHORT TITLE: VOTING BY MAIL
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KREISS-TOMKINS
05/01/19 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/01/19 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
05/19/20 (H) STA AT 10:00 AM DAVIS 106
WITNESS REGISTER
AMBER MCREYNOLDS, CEO
National Vote at Home Institute (NVHI)
Denver, Colorado
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 150, presented
NVHI's best practices policy suggestions for voting by mail.
WENDY UNDERHILL, Director of Elections and Redistricting
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)
Denver, Colorado
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 150, discussed the
various adjustments and actions that states are making to their
election processes because of the coronavirus (COVID-19)
pandemic.
BARBARA JONES, Municipal Clerk and Election Administrator
Municipality of Anchorage
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 150, outlined the
municipality's vote-by-mail process that was implemented in
2018.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:22:31 AM
CO-CHAIR JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS called the House State Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 10:22 a.m.
Representatives Story (via teleconference), Hopkins (via
teleconference), Fields (via teleconference), and Kreiss-Tomkins
were present at the call to order.
^PRESENTATION(S): Vote by Mail
PRESENTATION(S): Vote by Mail
10:23:31 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of
business would be a presentation, entitled "Vote by Mail."
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS explained that vote by mail is of keen
interest nationally due to the COVID-19 virus. The governor's
[3/11/20] declaration of a public health disaster emergency
provided the director of the Division of Elections with the
authority to conduct Alaska's primary and/or general elections
by mail. It was recently decided to conduct the primary by
mail. Today's witnesses will discuss what vote-by-mail
elections might look like and the committee will consider a
[proposed] committee substitute (CS) for HB 150.
10:25:21 AM
AMBER MCREYNOLDS, CEO, National Vote at Home Institute (NVHI),
noted that states across the U.S. are scrambling to make
adjustments to ensure that voters have options. She related
that National Vote at Home Institute (NVHI) is a non-profit,
non-partisan organization, that she was formerly the director of
elections for the city and county of Denver, Colorado, and that
she served as an election official for 14 years. She was
involved in implementing improvements, reforms, and enhancing
security for vote-by-mail and vote-at-home programs. In a non-
partisan capacity, she further noted, she provided strategic
advice and suggestions on how to run and implement best
practices in Alaska's recent state party-run primary election
for the Democratic side of the isle.
MS. MCREYNOLDS explained that NVHI helps states with policy
design and making sure that policies around voting by mail are
adopted with best practices in mind, as well as ensuring that
security and accessibility are balanced. Recently NVHI did a
50-state analysis in which it analyzed 30 different policy
components within each state. The analysis included over 2,000
different metrics and came up with suggestions by state.
MS. MCREYNOLDS advised that NVHI's first and foremost suggestion
for Alaska is to modify Alaska's current notary and witness
signature requirement to be a signature verification system.
This is a recommended best practice, especially in states that
predominately vote by mail. Such states all utilize a signature
verification system that includes a bipartisan comparison
process.
MS. MCREYNOLDS added that the signature verification system also
includes a process that notifies a voter when there is an issue
[cure process]. This is an important security measure that goes
along with good and robust voting-at-home systems.
MS. MCREYNOLDS said the second recommendation for Alaska is to
implement ballot-tracking software. This would enable tracking
of a voter's ballot from the moment it is printed to when it
goes out for delivery to providing a confirmation [to the voter]
of when the ballot is received and processed by an election
official. That is an important accountability tool that also
enhances security. Tracking has been rolled out in various
states, the latest being California. Several different vendors
provide and support this type of technology.
MS. MCREYNOLDS said the third recommendation for Alaska is to
provide an online way for voters to request an absentee ballot
if the state isn't mailing a ballot to everyone. This is more
efficient for the voters and also provides a more seamless
administrative process for election officials.
MS. MCREYNOLDS said another recommendation is pre-paid postage
for envelopes. This best practice eliminates any questions
voters might have and enhances security, so voters have the
option to return the ballot by mail or to drop it off.
MS. MCREYNOLDS said that, in addition to offering pre-paid
postage, NVHI recommends providing 24-hour/7-day a week ("24/7")
drop boxes in city or state structures such as libraries,
recreation centers, or city halls. This is a best practices
option because many voters like to drop off their ballots in
person and this preserves their ability to do so.
MS. MCREYNOLDS further advised that a good replacement ballot
process is needed so that if a voter moves and doesn't receive a
ballot there is a way to resolve that.
MS. MCREYNOLDS offered NVHI's belief that the gold standard is
to end the entire election process with risk limiting audits by
security experts. An audit was conducted at the end of Alaska's
recent primary; it went very well and is a testament to adopting
this type of best practice.
10:32:32 AM
MS. MCREYNOLDS, in response to Co-Chair Kreiss-Tomkins,
summarized NVHI's suggestions: 1) signature verification; 2) a
cure process; 3) ballot tracking solutions; 4) online request
process; 5) pre-paid postage for return envelopes; 6) increasing
options for ballot returns, which would mean drop boxes; 7)
risk-limiting audits; and 8) replacement ballots.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS noted that all these suggestions are
included in the proposed CS being considered today.
10:33:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY said she has heard concern about voter
fraud. She requested further details regarding signature
verification and tracking.
MS. MCREYNOLDS replied that for signature verification the voter
would sign the affidavit on the envelope. That envelope comes
back to the election official and the signature on the envelope
is compared to the signature on file that was provided when a
voter obtained a driver's license or state identification, or
registered to vote, or voted in person. The signature record on
any document that has been scanned into [the state's] system can
be compared for a match to the signature on the envelope with
the ballot. This comparison can be done with equipment that has
signature software verification built in. The software compares
the reference signature to the others and makes a match within
certain criteria. Another way to determine a match is manual
comparison, which is done by bipartisan teams of election
judges. She said she likes the software scanning process
because it is faster and more efficient. Then, if there are
signatures that the equipment cannot match, the election judges
can do a manual comparison and make a determination.
MS. MCREYNOLDS advised that when a signature doesn't match, the
best practice is to have bipartisan agreement that it should be
rejected. In Colorado, for instance, a rejection cannot occur
unless a Republican and a Democrat both say that the signature
doesn't match. The rejection triggers a cure letter and in that
cure letter the voter is immediately notified by either text,
email, or post letter that the signature did not match. The
voter must respond and cure that, meaning the voter must confirm
that they did in fact return the ballot and must provide a copy
of their identification with that cure letter back into the
office. The voter can email this cure letter, or use a text-to-
cure platform, or use a return envelope that is provided for
return of the affidavit to the office. Normally the best
practice is to allow 8-10 days post-election for that cure
process to happen.
10:37:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY requested further explanation about the
tracking software.
MS. MCREYNOLDS answered that the ballot tracking software is
designed to provide the voter an accountability of where their
ballot is. It is also a great tool for election administrators
because on the back end they can also track the ballot through
the postal process. The vendor that prints and mails the
ballots applies an "intelligent mail bar code" on both the
outgoing and return envelopes. Upon drop-off at the post
facility, the postal service scans the bar code, and the voter
receives a message that the U.S. Postal Service has received the
ballot that will be coming to them. On the back end, election
officials can verify that all the ballots given to the post
office were in fact scanned and are out for delivery. Depending
on the postal process for where the ballots are going, there
might be an additional scan that the ballot is out with the
carrier for delivery on a certain day. When the voter puts the
ballot in the return envelope, this process occurs again on the
back end when the post office receives the envelope and the
barcode is scanned, a message is triggered telling the voter the
post office has processed the ballot and it is on its way back
to election officials. The voter gets two final messages - one
when the election official has received it and one when the
ballot has been accepted, meaning the signature has been
verified. If something goes awry with the signature, that
system will also immediately notify the voter through text or
email that there is an issue, and they must click a link to
resolve the issues with the affidavit. The tracking system can
also provide other notices. For example, if a voter has moved
and not updated their address, the ballot will come back
undeliverable and the voter will get a message that they must
update their address.
MS. MCREYNOLDS added that the ballot tracking system provides
voters with direct accountability and gives election officials
the ability on the back end to track everything. If a voter
calls with an issue the election official can immediately see
where that issue came. Without this ballot tracking system,
election officials and voters alike don't have any visibility
into the process all that is known is that it was mailed at
the post office and nothing is known beyond that. A ballot
tracking system adds accountability, which enhances security.
10:41:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS, in regard to Colorado, inquired about
the percentage of signatures that were not accepted. He said he
is asking about this to determine whether Alaska's exceedingly
slow mail service could impact [the signature cure process].
MS. MCREYNOLDS responded that while she was in Denver [the
rejection rate] was an average of about 0.5 percent, a very
small number. She stressed the importance of developing
statewide standards and training to provide consistency in
applying the standards. Each county in a state should go
through training on the standards so that all election judges
get the same training in policies and procedures. In regard to
the 0.5 percent, she said the cure rate varies. How many get
cured and how many people respond to [the cure letter] tends to
vary by the race and how close that race might be. For example,
if it's a "blowout" in a particular election, not as many people
may cure. But usually, because the cure process is easy and
there are lots of ways to cure, it can be that about 50 percent
of those get cured. She explained that a 100 percent cure isn't
likely and isn't necessarily wanted since it is a security
measure. Some of those that don't get cured are by design it
means the system caught something that shouldn't be, for
example, if a new person moves into a house and votes that
ballot. Such a situation needs to be caught, so it is
appropriate that there isn't a cure. Any signatures that are
not cured are reviewed by law enforcement or a district attorney
post-election to ensure there isn't any criminal issue. A
criminal issue is really rare, but there have been some, and
this is something that safeguards the system and ensures that
any bad actors are held accountable.
10:44:22 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS, in regard to Alaska's primary election, asked
whether there are any technical or procedural reasons that
Alaska's Division of Elections couldn't be more pro-active about
getting ballots out to people so that they can vote at home
while still maintaining the capacity to vote in person.
MS. MCREYNOLDS replied that when the laws in Colorado were being
written, there were several reasons for restructuring how to
deliver elections. Number one was that voters were increasingly
asking for vote-by-mail ballots. Given this trend, it was
decided to deliver this in a more efficient way. This can be
done in a couple different ways. The Colorado style of reform
entailed mailing a ballot to every elector while still
preserving in-person voting options at voting centers, meaning a
voter can go to any voting center location rather than being
restricted to only one polling place. She said she likes this
model because it cuts down on voters showing up at the wrong
polling location if they have moved. Also, in a pandemic
situation where polling place adjustments and changes are
sometimes happening really late, providing vote centers is a
better way to do it because each center is equipped to serve any
voter, making the process more resilient for those last-minute
changes to occur. Ms. McReynolds advised that for a state the
size of Alaska she would go about sending a ballot to everyone
in the state by contracting with a third-party vendor to provide
that service, similar to what Rhode Island and Maryland are
currently doing. All the envelopes can be the same design for
the entire state. An economy of scale is realized and makes it
more efficient for the localities because it removes some of the
manual burden for the local jurisdictions.
MS. MCREYNOLDS further noted that if a state won't be
automatically sending a ballot to each voter, it would be wise
to educate the public in a broad way. For example, applications
could be sent to each elector so they have an application
proactively, or a communication could be sent to electors so
they know they can sign up for vote by mail. These processes
are currently happening in Michigan, Georgia, and Kentucky.
10:47:48 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS, in regard to signature verification,
inquired whether there are issues with the data quality or
format of signatures on file with the state for comparison with
signatures on vote-by-mail ballots.
MS. MCREYNOLDS answered that while she doesn't know how Alaska
handles this, most states scan nearly all documents that come
into their system, whether those are voter registration
applications, absentee ballot applications, in-person signature
cards, or driver's license signatures. All those things are
housed and scanned into the voter registration system and kept
as a part of a voter file. States that don't have a lot of
signatures on file enter into a memorandum of understanding with
the department that runs motor vehicle offices to consume the
image files from motor vehicle offices and add them into the
voter registration database. It usually isn't a difficult
technical process to do because it is uploading imagery into the
system. Alaska, she presumed, should be able to do this
relatively easily because the state is also currently doing that
for other types of transactions.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS noted that the lieutenant governor's
office and the Division of Elections declined the committee's
invitation to participate in today's hearing. He expressed his
hope that the committee will be able to get a lay of the land
about the state's signature data. He thanked Ms. McReynolds for
her testimony.
HB 150-VOTING BY MAIL
10:50:55 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of
business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 150, "An Act requiring state
elections and local elections that the state is responsible for
conducting to be conducted by mail; requiring certain vote-by-
mail ballots and election materials to be provided in certain
written languages other than English; establishing an online
ballot tracking and registration verification system;
establishing voting centers and ballot drop boxes; eliminating
the use of polling places, absentee ballots, and questioned
ballots in certain elections; and providing for an effective
date."
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked for a motion to adopt a committee
substitute.
10:51:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 150, Version 31-LS0311\M, Bullard,
1/10/20, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version M was before the committee.
10:51:30 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS explained that Version M is modeled
after the Colorado system, which includes all the provisions
discussed by Ms. McReynolds. He noted that Version M has some
adaptations for Alaska and the intent is to parse through the
language to refine and improve the legislation's substance so as
to create an optimal policy document that the legislature will
be positioned to act on in the future.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 150 was held over.
^PRESENTATION(S): Vote by Mail
PRESENTATION(S): Vote by Mail
10:52:37 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of
business would be a return to the presentation, entitled "Vote
by Mail."
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited the next witness, Ms. Underhill,
to discuss how states and legislatures across the U.S. are
navigating elections during this [coronavirus ("COVID-19")]
pandemic and the measures the states are taking to protect
public health while still ensuring the seamless administration
of elections.
10:53:26 AM
WENDY UNDERHILL, Director of Elections and Redistricting,
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), noted that
NCSL is the nation's bipartisan organization that serves the
needs of legislators and legislative staff throughout the U.S.
and its territories. She related that as a Colorado voter she
has personal experience with the voting described by Ms.
McReynolds. For example, at age 16 her daughter pre-registered
to vote, using a signature with nice, rounded letters and
distinct individual letters. However, by the time her daughter
went to vote for the first time at age 18, she had changed her
signature to just a slash. This was caught and her daughter was
notified of the signature problem and given the opportunity to
fix it. Ms. Underhill said she was pleased to see that the
system did work. She further related that she signed up for
ballot tracking and subsequently received texts on her cell
phone throughout the steps of the tracking process.
MS. UNDERHILL explained that NCSL's work is informational, which
means it doesn't offer advice on policy matters that come before
state legislatures, but NCSL does sometimes lobby at the
national level in Washington, DC. She said NCSL provides a 50-
state perspective on key topics and the one topic right now
seems to be how to conduct elections in a safe manner for voters
and poll workers given the coronavirus. All states are making
adjustments to their election process because of the coronavirus
and in large part that is because voters are making adjustments
in how they choose to vote. As long as the coronavirus appears
to be a risk, voters will be deciding for themselves whether
they want to use absentee voting or vote-by-mail to avoid going
to a polling place. As the voters have shifted, the states have
shifted. States are faced with the need to scale up their
existing processes or to adopt new processes in record time. So
far, most of those shifts have come through the executive branch
and yet legislatures are where election policy is generally
created. Legislatures are now starting to take the lead again
and Alaska's legislature is at the front end of that wave.
MS. UNDERHILL reviewed four categories of actions that states
have taken so far; the categories aren't mutually exclusive, and
some states are doing more than one of them. In the first
category, she said, 18 states have postponed their primary or
other kind of election, with most of these being elections that
were scheduled for April or May and that will now take place in
June or July. Of these postponements the majority were
presidential or state primaries, but a few states have also
delayed state primaries or municipal elections. Alaska was not
part of that postponement trend because its state primary is
late in the season on August 18; only six states hold their
state primary later than does Alaska.
MS. UNDERHILL said the second category is that a number of
states are making it easier to request absentee ballots, which
in essence is a way to encourage mail voting without having to
make a sweeping policy change or enact new laws. This category
can take several forms. For instance, of the 16 states that
require voters to provide an excuse to get an absentee ballot,
about half have declared that fear of COVID-19 is an acceptable
reason under their laws. Eleven states have taken the novel
step of mailing absentee ballot applications to all registered
voters for primary elections. With this decision to send a
ballot application, it remains the voter's responsibility to
request the ballot according to whatever the existing state law
is. Mailing out an absentee ballot application can be seen as
the middle ground between running elections as usual and moving
to mostly mail elections. Sending applications to all voters
does require resources, but there is reason to think that
coronavirus will make elections more expensive this year no
matter what decisions are made. The application mailing itself
may serve to both give election officials new information for
list maintenance purposes and to ensure that only those people
who want a mail ballot will have one sent to them when election
time arrives.
MS. UNDERHILL added that creating an online portal for the
application process is another way to make it easier for voters
to get an absentee ballot. With a ballot request portal, a
voter can request a mail ballot without exchanging a paper form
with a local election official. After the portal is set up, it
is expected to reduce the cost of managing absentee ballots
because no mailing is required and processing times for each
request will be much reduced compared with managing paper
applications. In addition, human error will be reduced. Four
states have either created online portals or now plan to do so,
bringing the total to 14 states that are providing this avenue
and she expects to see more of that moving forward. Ms.
Underhill advised that NCSL could electronically provide the
committee with its report titled "Voting Outside the Polling
Place," which outlines many of the policy choices she is
presenting today.
MS. UNDERHILL said the third category is mail-in ballots, not
just ballot applications to all voters. Five states already had
this as their standard operating procedure before COVID-19 hit.
She noted that she used to refer to these as the "all-mail"
election states but now she is calling them the "mostly-mail"
election states because even when ballots are sent to all
registered voters, states still maintain some kind of Election
Day operation, such as vote centers, to assist voters who
haven't received their ballot or who have another kind of issue,
or for same-day registration, and for anyone who has moved
within the jurisdiction and needs to update their registration.
In addition to the five states, California's governor has, by
executive order, directed that November's election be conducted
via mailing ballots to all voters. Montana's governor issued a
directive that gave all counties the authority to decide if they
nd
would like to conduct this year's June 2 state primary by mail
and all counties elected to do so. Maryland, Nevada, and New
Jersey have moved to a mostly-mail primary. Nebraska, North
Dakota, and California prior to this year's directive, allow
counties to decide on their own whether to conduct their
elections by mail. Ten of Nebraska's counties used mail for
their primaries and North Dakota's governor signed a directive
that strongly encouraged counties to do so for the primary.
When looking at the aforementioned states on a map, a geographic
trend of mostly western states can be seen, with the exception
of Maryland and New Jersey. For the most part, voters have been
pleased to have the option to vote at home, but of course not
all people feel the same and there may be some categories of
voters who are disadvantaged by mail voting. One of these
groups is Native Americans, but she doesn't whether that extends
to Alaska Natives. Other groups who may not be easily served by
mail voting are those who move often, who are homeless, anyone
with low literacy, and some, but not all, people with
disabilities.
MS. UNDERHILL outlined why more states aren't likely to move to
mostly-mail elections this year. She said one reason is that
making a shift can be hard to do depending on what a state's
voting process looks like at this moment. For example, if many
people are already voting by mail, then processes are probably
already in place that can be scaled up. But if voting by mail
is still a very small portion of all voting, then scaling up
presents some challenges. States that have moved to mostly-mail
elections got there over a course of years with policies that
have been encouraging mail voting, such as creating a permanent
absentee voting list. She offered her understanding that Alaska
has gotten to the point that a voter only has to ask once to be
able to receive mail ballots for all elections in that year.
MS. UNDERHILL highlighted the four topics that states should
address as they are preparing to go to more mail. First is that
the signature on the outside of the return envelope is checked
against signatures on file. Second is the ability to begin to
process, but not count, these ballots before Election Day. This
is because a huge pile of ballots could arrive on Election Day
and everyone would be sorting, opening, and scanning, and so
results could be delayed. Third is to have a way for a voter to
be contacted. Fourth is that mail ballots can be reported at a
precinct level and not only reported at an aggregate level.
This is appreciated by candidates and campaign managers as a way
to know more precisely where their voters can be found, which
helps with their campaigning.
MS. UNDERHILL said the fourth category is that all states are
striving to make polling places safer. Measures include moving
from touched screen machines, to using paper ballots, to giving
every voter their own pen to vote with, to working out the
details of drive-through voting. Other measures include the
marking of six-foot intervals for voters waiting in line and
providing poll workers with masks and gloves.
MS. UNDERHILL commented that the maintenance of high voter
confidence in election processes is very important. Anything
states can do to assure voters that their votes are going to be
counted correctly regardless of how the ballots are delivered to
the voter or delivered back to the election official is
important. This means that voter education may be more
important than it ever has been before.
11:06:16 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS requested Ms. Underhill to speak to the
transition time for the Montana counties that went to a vote-at-
home system. He further inquired how the respective divisions
of elections implemented that and what the timeline was. He
said he is thinking about Alaska's primary election this year
and the steps that Alaska's Division of Elections will need to
take to make it easier for people to vote at home.
MS. UNDERHILL responded that election officials in Montana are
the county clerks and they have favored moving to mostly-mail
elections for some time. Over the course of years, they have
been encouraging people to choose to vote by absentee or mail
ballots, so the percentage of voters doing so in Montana is
already pretty high and the processes are in place. She offered
to check with the state election director in Montana should Co-
Chair Fields like further details.
11:07:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether Ms. Underhill has any
suggestions for mechanisms that could be used to help alleviate
any problems with voting by mail for disadvantaged groups.
MS. UNDERHILL replied that having some amount of in-person
voting is probably the best way to work with that situation so
there is a place for people to go to vote on Election Day. This
way, any problems can be handled in-person on Election Day.
Because each of the disadvantaged groups is unique, voter
education is important here, as is working with people who are
advocates or leaders for these groups.
11:09:15 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked why there are concerns about
access to voting-by-mail/voting-at-home in "Indian Country."
MS. UNDERHILL answered that oftentimes addresses are not handled
the same on a reservation as they are elsewhere, and most people
receive their mail at post office boxes instead of a box at
their house. The problem is that there aren't enough postal
boxes, so several families may be sharing one postal box and a
person's ballot may not be there for them. On the Navajo
reservation in Arizona, people live many miles away from their
post box and may only get into town once or twice a month to get
their mail. During parts of the year the roads are impassable,
making it tricky sometimes to get one's ballot. There are ways
to work on the addressing, she advised. North Dakota has worked
to some extent on having a way to identify something that
doesn't have a street and a number, such as looking at a
geographic map and pointing to where the house is. On the
Navajo reservation, she continued, voting has often been a
community day that takes place at the tribal headquarters,
perhaps with a party that goes along with it, and so there is a
cultural piece there as well. Also coming into play is that
depending on the Native American group, people could be fluent
in their own language but have literacy problems in English.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS noted that the aforementioned has
parallels to the Alaska Native community.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited the next witness, Ms. Jones, to
share the Municipality of Anchorage's experience with adopting a
vote-at-home policy and to discuss whether any of the
infrastructure developed by Anchorage could serve the State of
Alaska's statewide needs, should that be asked for.
11:12:51 AM
BARBARA JONES, Municipal Clerk and Election Administrator,
Municipality of Anchorage, explained that the Anchorage Assembly
established vote-by-mail in Anchorage in 2016 as a strategy to
increase voter turnout and empower Anchorage residents. Three
things occurred during the time period between 2016 and the 2018
implementation of vote-by-mail: 1) a Request for Proposals; 2)
the leasing of an updated, functional, secure space; and 3)
updating of the municipal code. In the Request for Proposals
there were three key functions. The first was a mail sorter and
signature verification system. The second was a ballot scanning
and tabulation system. The third was a printing and mailing
vendor. Getting the Request for Proposals done, and making sure
it was done right, took up the bulk of this time period. In
regard to which, if any, of those could be used by the State of
Alaska, it is interesting to note that the state has exactly the
same ballot scanning and tabulation system as does the
Municipality of Anchorage. The state's mail sorter system is
different than the municipality's system. The signature
verification system used by the municipality ingests signatures
from the State of Alaska voter registration base. She said she
believes the State of Alaska also has that capacity, but she
doesn't know the exact relationship. Using the voter
information from the State of Alaska database, the municipality
assigns unique ballot package identification to each voter, then
submits that to the vendor that prints, inserts, and mails the
ballot packages from its secure facility to each registered
voter in Anchorage. In regard to this system, she said she
doesn't know what the state's capacity is for doing that.
MS. JONES said Anchorage's vote-by-mail system is very similar
to what was discussed by the previous two speakers. The
municipality provides the information it gets from the state to
the printing and mailing vendor and the vendor then mails a
ballot package to every registered voter. The municipality
accepts the return ballot envelopes via mail, via 18 secure drop
boxes, as well as via its vote centers. In the past the
municipality had six vote centers, but this year due to COVID-19
the municipality only had one. The municipality runs the
ballots through its mail sorter, which checks for duplicates,
the required identification, and other issues with the envelope.
The municipality verifies the signature on the envelope against
the signatures in the State of Alaska voter registration system.
After signature verification, the municipality opens the
envelopes and separates the ballots in the confidential manner
that the municipality has done with absentee-by-mail envelopes
for 40 years and as done by the state for absentee ballots.
After the ballots are separated from the envelopes, the
municipality runs them through the high-speed scanners and then
on election night tabulates the numbers and reports the results,
which is the same system that the state has.
11:17:54 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether the Municipality of
Anchorage has experienced any fraud associated with its vote-by-
mail/vote-at-home system.
MS. JONES responded that this is a difficult question because as
discussed by the prior speakers, Anchorage has a cure process.
If someone has a signature that doesn't match, they get a cure
letter. Municipal code requires that a cure notification be
sent within three days of processing the envelope. The
municipality's statistics are very similar to the ones mentioned
by Ms. McReynolds; the municipality's cure rate is about 50
percent. Some envelopes were not cured, but as was said by Ms.
McReynolds, maybe they all shouldn't be cured. In the past
there have been a couple of envelopes of concern that were
discussed with the municipal attorney. One of those was at a
vote center, so it was a live situation and not vote-by-mail.
It was reported to the Anchorage Election Commission and the
commission asked that it be moved forward. The second one was a
vote-by-mail situation where it appeared that a senior voted
both the senior and junior mail ballot envelopes that were sent
to the same address. Those are the only two situations she's
had, and she reports those to the assembly every year. There
were a couple more this year, including one that stated, Voted
by Facebook live," and she presumes that it was due to COVID-19
as this hasn't been seen before. Since it was an invalid
signature, it was rejected for lack of signature, but it wasn't
believed to be fraud.
11:20:28 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked what the first things would be that Ms.
Jones would do, based on her knowledge of the state's system, to
make implementing a State of Alaska vote-at-home system as
successful as possible.
MS. JONES answered that one thing would be to send out absentee-
by-mail applications to every registered voter. That is how
people get to make a choice as to whether they want to vote at
home. Second, the Municipality of Anchorage sent a postcard to
voters to make sure the municipality had their correct mailing
address. Voter addresses sometimes need updating, but when
people go to polling stations their address doesn't really
matter. So, sending a postcard is step that could be considered
for a vote-at-home system. A third step that could be
considered, and which may be more of a long-term process, is
that a voter in Alaska can register to get an absentee ballot
this year and can request a ballot for either or both the
primary and general elections. She suggested that there also be
an option to permanently request an absentee ballot. For
example, some Alaska voters are snowbirds that are gone from the
state every year in November. A permanent absentee list could
be really helpful to voters.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS noted there was legislation this last
session that would have established a permanent absentee-by-mail
setup, but it didn't make it through the process.
11:24:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY noted the lieutenant governor decided not
to do the primary election with vote-by-mail. She requested Ms.
Jones to elaborate on why vote-by-mail might be more difficult
with Alaska's closed and party-run primary system.
MS. JONES apologized for being unable to elaborate. She
explained that the Municipality of Anchorage is non-partisan so
that it is not an issue for her. However, she continued, based
on research and trips to the Lower 48 for the municipality, she
knows that other jurisdictions do conduct primaries by vote-by-
mail. She recommended the committee contact Thurston County in
the state of Washington to get further information.
11:25:28 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS inquired about the amount of change in
voter turnout after the municipality's adoption of vote-at-home.
MS. JONES responded that the municipality's turnout was in the
high teens to low twenties and now it is in the low thirties or
low twenties, so a 5 to 10 percent increase. She said she
thinks a bump is being seen because vote-at-home is easier for
voters. Further, the municipality's voter registration is much
larger with 232,000 registered voters in Anchorage, which is
pretty close to its adult population. However, she noted, it is
thought that this voter registration number may be a bit high
because people have moved and not provided notice to the state
that they aren't living in Alaska anymore.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS pointed out that automatic voter
registration and the permanent fund dividend took effect at the
same time. He asked how many ballots were being cast in
municipal elections before and after vote-at-home.
MS. JONES replied that the number was around 50,000 before vote-
at-home. In 2018 it was 79,000, and this year it is about
72,000.
11:27:35 AM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether he is accurate in
concluding that the quality of signatures in the State of
Alaska's voter registration database was sufficient to
administer the signature verification process.
MS. JONES confirmed the conclusion is accurate; the signatures
are excellent. She explained that when the municipality has
signatures for which it doesn't have a reference signature in
its downloaded State of Alaska voter registration database, the
municipality contacts the state and has an excellent partnership
with the state. For example, in 2019 the municipality contacted
the state for over 200 signatures that it didn't have on file
and the State of Alaska found all but one. The municipality
assumes that the one signature was someone who registered online
and never provided the data that was needed.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opined that voter-by-mail/vote-at-home
is often seen through a possible partisan or political image of
concern. He said he is putting on record the April 15, 2020,
study from the Stanford Democracy and Polarization Lab within
the Institute for Economic Policy Research. It is titled "The
Neutral Partisan Effects of Vote by Mail, Evidence from 2011
Rollout." The study compared the political and partisan results
of elections in the different counties that had administered
rollouts for before and after their vote-by-mail rollouts. It
was found that turnout increased but there was not any partisan
advantage to one party or another. He urged that the committee
and Alaskans keep this study in mind.
11:31:01 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 11:31
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CS HB 150 (H STA) ver M 5.19.20.pdf |
HSTA 5/19/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| Sectional CS HB 150 (H STA) ver M 5.19.20.pdf |
HSTA 5/19/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB 150 Supporting Document Letters of Opposition 5.26.20.pdf |
HSTA 5/19/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB 150 Supporting Document Roberts Testimony 5.28.20.pdf |
HSTA 5/19/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |