01/20/2005 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB36 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| * | SB 36 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
January 20, 2005
3:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gene Therriault, Chair
Senator Thomas Wagoner, Vice Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins
Senator Bettye Davis
Senator Kim Elton
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 36
"An Act relating to applications requesting the delivery of
absentee ballots by mail."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 36
SHORT TITLE: ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATIONS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) THERRIAULT
01/11/05 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 01/07/05
01/11/05 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/11/05 (S) STA, JUD
WITNESS REGISTER
Laura Glaiser, Director
Division of Elections
P.O. Box 110017
Juneau, AK 99811-0017
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke to the difficulties associated with
the November 2004 election that are addressed in SB 36
Annette Kreitzer, Chief of Staff
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
P.O. Box 110015
Juneau, AK 99811-0015
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke to difficulties associated with the
November 2004 election that are addressed in SB 36
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR GENE THERRIAULT called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:32:17 PM. Present were Senators
Elton, Wagoner, Huggins, Davis, and Chair Therriault.
SB 36-ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATIONS
CHAIR GENE THERRIAULT announced that the committee would hear
his bill, SB 36. He had the bill drafted and introduced as a
result of the absentee ballot request issue that came to light
during the most recent general election. The entities that
encouraged people to use the absentee ballot process increased
appreciably and a number of the groups developed their own
request forms. Some of the request forms had a return addresses
for an entity other than that of the Division of Elections. He
felt that was inappropriate because of the sensitive data that
the forms contain.
3:34:12 PM
He asked the legislative legal drafter to develop suggested
wording on how to place something in statute to make it clear
that such intermediary handling of absentee ballot requests is
not acceptable in the future. There is also language that
specifically notices political parties that they may neither
encourage nor assist in such activity in the future.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Laura Glaiser from the Division of
Elections to give some background on the issues raised in the
previous general election. He also asked her to advise members
of any other problems they might want to consider before passing
SB 36 and that he did not intend to take final action on the
bill that day.
He noted the Governor's bill, SB 66, was introduced and it
addresses this and other election related issues. A difference
is that SB 66 contains a consequence section and he would like
to discuss incorporating something similar into his bill.
AS 15.56.060 states that unlawful interference in an election is
a crime and this bill would add intermediary handling of
absentee ballot requests to the list of unlawful activity.
He asked Ms. Glaiser to come forward.
3:36:16 PM
LAURA GLAISER, Director of the Division of Elections introduced
herself and asked how she should proceed.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked her to give some history. He noted that
there had been a marked increase in the number of absentee
ballot requests nationwide and asked her to discuss the specific
circumstances.
MS. GLAISER reported that the Alaska Republican Party was the
first to print absentee ballot requests that they generated and
this was for the primary election. When the party chairman
contacted her and asked about format and other particulars, she
advised them to use the state form.
She then showed members absentee ballot request forms that were
developed and used by the Republican Party, the Knowles
campaign, and the Democratic Party. She understood that the
Republican Party sent out about 90,000 absentee ballot request
forms statewide for the primary.
The Republican Party form was similar to the state form in print
and font, but portions of the form were pre-filled for the
voter. The voters name, residence address, mailing address, and
often the gender were pre-printed on the form. It was also pre-
marked so the voter would receive absentee ballots for all
elections.
3:38:07 PM
MS. GLAISER said the voter was required to say where they wanted
the ballot mailed, to sign the form, and to fold and seal the
form that was pre-addressed to the Division of Elections.
3:38:26 PM
The Knowles campaign was the next to approach the division with
a proposed form. She noted that the Knowles form is easily
identified and that it clearly stated that it was paid for by
Tony Knowles for U. S. Senate. That form was directed back to
the Division of Elections. It didn't go to an intermediary.
Concerns that were expressed [to the Knowles Campaign] regarding
the form weren't changed. For example, the Alaska voter number
was not included on the form and the division likes it there
because identity theft is less likely from a voter ID number.
The Knowles form had no preprinting; the voter filled out all
information.
Because no one is required to check with the division and anyone
may track those who request an absentee ballot, she isn't sure
which entities' form came next. She understands that the
Republican Party tracked and sent another mailing for the
general election.
3:40:43 PM
MS. GLAISER explained that she made copies of each form for the
October 12 press conference that she and Lt. Governor Leman
called when "this all kind of blew up in our face."
3:41:06 PM
The Alaska Democratic Party (ADP) form was next and it came in
two sections. It was a three-fold mailer with two copies. The
first flag for the division was that there was no place on the
application for a residence address although state law requires
that. The division had to make follow-up contact with the voter
to get an address. A second problem was that the form was open
faced so that the signature and private voter data was not
protected. Finally, the form was returned to the ADP rather than
the Division of Elections.
MS. GLAISER said that the division first became aware of the
problem when several employees expressed concern that they had
received the form at a PO Box and that the required residence
address was missing. The other concern was that the form was
returned to a party rather than the Division of Elections.
The Division of Elections, region II, Anchorage office began
receiving forms in pre-addressed postage paid envelopes that the
division provides to registrars. The Anchorage office date
stamped the envelopes then sent them to Juneau by DHL.
Thereafter, the forms began arriving by the box.
She pointed out that they had no ability to anticipate this
volume. As the Anchorage office applied date stamps, they began
to notice that as much as a month might have passed since the
voter signed the form. She couldn't speak to where the form had
been, but it's likely that the form didn't get to her office and
entered into their database as quickly as the voter might have
thought.
3:44:19 PMP
Two or three days after the October press conference, her office
sent letters to over 900 voters saying that they couldn't
process the application until they received a residence address
to enter into the database. As a second option, a by fax
application was included on the back of the letter.
3:45:09 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked about the issue of stickers that were
placed on some of the applications.
MS. GLAISER explained that that was one of the reasons for the
October press conference. When they first noticed there was no
residence address she sent an email to the parties stating that
some voters asked about ADP and questioned which form was
official. After she sent the email, the division began receiving
Democratic Party applications with residence address added on a
preprinted label. Although this information was added after the
voter signed the form, the division took the stand that the
voter shouldn't be faulted and they processed the applications.
3:46:47 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked what the Department of Law said about the
form having been altered after the voter signed it.
MS. GLAISER replied they said it was wrong, but because the
division and the Department of Law agreed that they didn't want
to disenfranchise voters, they kept the applications moving. She
reported that there were 58,000 applications and there were days
when they received between 7,000 and 11,000 applications. A
number of these applications weren't complete which meant that
it took elections staff time to help the voter complete the
form.
She added that under current law, the last day voters could
request an application is seven days prior to an election and
she would like the committee to extend that time to at least ten
days prior to an election.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER noted that a newspaper recently reported
that 29,000 absentee forms weren't accounted for and he
questioned whether this wasn't at least partially responsible.
MS. GLAISER replied the non-standard forms did cause delays but
they weren't responsible for all the difficulties. For instance,
the special advance ballot requests increased by 1,300 percent.
Voters that request special advance ballots actually receive
two. The first ballot is mailed 60 days before the election and
the second is sent when all other absentee ballots are mailed.
Although she explained the procedure to the reporter, the news
release didn't make it clear that when she mailed out 58,000
ballots, some voters got two ballots. Without querying the
database it's hard to explain and defend ourselves, she said.
3:49:24 PM
MS. GLAISER emphasized that her staff did a terrific job under
difficult circumstances. The election coordinator slept in her
office. "I've never seen efforts like our staff did -
temporaries, range 8s." That being said, it's correct, they
didn't get everyone's application out. They processed the
applications that were complete and tried to get missing
information whenever possible.
CHAIR THERRIAULT acknowledged that the number of votes cast was
a record.
3:50:19 PM
MS. GLAISER added that the absentee votes were up by about 87
percent from the election in 2000.
CHAIR THERRIAULT remarked that it's a good thing that so many
people participated in the process, but he didn't believe the
volume and the intermediate steps caused by non state generated
applications could have been anticipated.
MS. GLAISER replied that, as a manager, it was difficult to
plan. It's acceptable that the forms aren't state generated but
she would like them to be approved by the director of elections
so they could better prepare. At that time, they would ask
whether the forms would be partially pre-filled. The Republican
Party did that, which made the data entry easier for the
division. She showed another sample that used shiny card stock
and a small font, which slowed data entry. The state generated
forms were developed years ago and they were developed to make
data entry as easy as possible.
3:52:22 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked about the issue of whether the mail-in
was a voter registration or an absentee ballot request.
MS. GLAISER replied that Alaska state law says that when a voter
requests an application, they are updating voter registration
information at the same time. She pointed out that instructions
on some forms made that clear, but others didn't.
3:53:57 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT commented that some voters expressed confusion
regarding the fact that one form performed both functions.
MS. GLAISER agreed that they did receive some of those calls.
3:54:39 PM
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked what sort of concerns she and her
staff had when they first became aware of the different forms.
MS. GLAISER replied that her first concern was that the
applications weren't returned directly. An entity other than the
Division of Elections had individuals' private information and
it might or might not have been protected. The Democratic Party
form stated that driver's license number, social security
number, phone and email had to be provided, but state law
requires neither a phone number nor email address. She clarified
that the Knowles Campaign forms and the Republican forms were
sent directly to the division.
She made the point that Senator Guess worked very hard on
legislation to protect voter confidentiality and it "went out
the door with this because it went to a party first." The Lt.
Governor wrote a letter to the chair of the Democratic Party
asking particulars about their possession of the forms because
he had similar concerns. When the information doesn't go
directly to the state, you fear that voter caging is occurring.
This is the political term for gathering and tracking voter
information. She clarified that she doesn't know that this was
going on, but that's what you fear when applications first go to
an entity other than the state.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked whether she had seen this happen before.
MS. GLAISER replied she was the new division director, but this
was the first time the division had seen this happen. It's not
uncommon for candidates or parties to ask for voter registration
forms and absentee ballot forms to take to fairs and other
forums, but there is no record of applications that were
returned to an entity other than the Division of Elections.
SENATOR HUGGINS stated that he assumed that her concern was that
voters could become disenfranchised.
MS. GLAISER told him that her staff thinks in terms of how
quickly they are able to deliver a ballot and the
confidentiality of the record. They were very concerned that
personal information and signatures went through the mail
without any privacy protection. The division designed a privacy
flap to protect signatures before her tenure so this has been a
concern for some time, she said.
3:58:57 PM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if many voters expressed concern that they
couldn't vote due to the process.
MS. GLAISER replied they tried to answer questions in a press
release and a press conference, but she didn't want to generate
fear. Some people did call the division and ask whether the ADP
was an elections office. At the beginning they didn't know what
precipitated the question.
SENATOR HUGGINS said he assumes she agrees that changes are
needed so there isn't a recurrence.
MS. GLAISER said yes and both Senator Therriault's bill and the
Governor's bill address the issues of pre-approval by the
division, and mailing directly to the division. Regional
supervisors have advised her that there are entities other than
parties that gather voter registrations and keep copies of the
forms. When registrars are trained they are told not to keep
these records, but state law doesn't prohibit it so the state
has to decide whether it wants to protect those records.
4:01:05 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT remarked that he saw the forms when they became
an issue, but he didn't catch the point about the phone number
and email address until she mentioned it just then.
MS. GLAISER added that information isn't captured from the state
generated form unless an individual has indicated that they
would like to be an election worker. They keep the information
on their form in anticipation of an update to the voter
registration system.
CHAIR THERRIAULT posited that the only reason that information
was requested is that the intermediary wanted that information.
MS. GLAISER replied, "You could say that, but I couldn't
possibly."
SENATOR KIM ELTON expressed appreciation to the Division of
Elections for moving very quickly when he asked questions for
some of his constituents who wanted to vote absentee. He asked
if it's fair to say that nothing illegal happened, but that
there were miscommunications and some mechanical issues that
complicated her job and that might confuse some Alaskans.
4:04:03 PM
MS. GLAISER said she can't speak to what the ADP did, but the
suggested legislation would make it clear that only the Division
of Elections could receive voter registration and application
forms. What was done hadn't been done before and without a bill
it isn't clear enough.
SENATOR ELTON said this is one approach and the Governor's bill
adds to this bill, but there are other approaches. "Can't we say
that the absentee ballot request must be the official state form
or one step less than that and say that the director has to
approve any absentee ballot request form?" Other ways might be
less intrusive to party functions and would get to the
mechanical issues that were problematic.
4:05:31 PM
MS. GLAISER said it's a policy call for the Legislature, but she
urged members to protect voter confidentiality and when the
forms go to an entity other than the state, then privacy can't
be ensured.
SENATOR ELTON said that one way to address that would be to
inform people that the information would be collected by X and
sent to the Division of Elections.
MS. GLAISER restated that it's a policy call.
4:06:48 PM
SENATOR ELTON asked how the term political group was being
defined in the legislation. Is it the Juneau Chamber of
Commerce, Trustees of Alaska, Retired Public Employees?
CHAIR THERRIAULT said he would check, but he wasn't sure whether
that section of the bill is in statute. There might be a
definition section at the end or you could make reference to an
area giving a definition, he said. If this is the language the
committee agrees to, a definition reference could be added.
SENATOR ELTON stated that he realized the bill wasn't moving
that day, but a definition was in order before the bill moves
from committee.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER stated that it would make sense to define
a political group as any group that is registered with the
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC).
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Glaiser to respond.
4:08:00 PM
MS. GLAISER stated that SB 66 addresses that in 15.20.081(a). It
states that applications must be submitted directly to Division
of Elections thereby negating the need to define political group
or political party. Current state law says, "A qualified voter
may apply by mail or electronic transmission to the director for
an absentee ballot." It doesn't say directly to the director so
it's unclear. In years past, people thought it came directly to
the division and it now needs to be more clearly defined.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked about the advice the division received
from the attorney general's office regarding the augmentation of
information and pasting over information with labels by
person(s) other than the voter. He asked whether this was a
violation of regulation.
4:09:48 PM
MS. GLAISER advised that she was reading from the opinion dated
October 14, 2004 that says that "Alaska Statutes don't expressly
authorize a third party to submit an absentee by mail
application on behalf of a voter. To do so would create serious
public policy concerns." With regard to a third party and the
postcard format of the applications, the opinion was that "the
applications more vulnerable to alterations and leaves the
voters confidential information in view, potentially revealing
private information to third parties." With regard to a third
party adding or changing information on the form as was done
with the stickers, the opinion advised that, "Under AS
15.20.081(b), an absentee by mail application also serves as a
voter registration application. The voter registration statutes
require that registration applications contain an attestation,
by the voter, that the information is true and a certification
of the applicant understands he or she can be prosecuted for a
false statement."
AS 15.07.060 contemplates that "a voter who registers by mail
will provide the information required directly to the division
of elections or a voter registration agency unless the voter is
incapacitated."
4:11:14 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT remarked that it's clear that the statute
didn't anticipate that the data might be changed after a person
filled out and signed the form attesting to the accuracy of the
data. However, it can certainly be read that it isn't allowed.
It points out that an intermediary stop is ripe for problems.
4:11:48 PM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked what the variance was in the most recent
election that precipitated a recount.
MS. GLAISER said the state pays for a recount if the variance is
less that .5 percent and although the variance was more than
that, another party requested the recount.
SENATOR HUGGINS remarked that there seems to be an increase in
the number of people who question voter intent, which has
resulted in increased recounts. He asked how much it cost the
person requesting the recount.
MS. GLAISER told him that it's $10,000 for a statewide recount
and $750 for a district recount.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked who requested the recount.
MS. GLAISER said it was Concerned Citizens for Alaska. Joe
Sonneman headed the group and there was also a professor from
Fairbanks who was involved.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked whether it cost the state anything.
MS. GLAISER replied they've spent about $39,000 to date.
SENATOR ELTON stated that addressing how much to charge back is
going to be a difficult question. However, the individuals that
requested the recount said that they were confident in the
Alaska system after having gone through the process. Sending
such a positive signal back to voters may be worth more than
$39,000.00.
He asked whether anyone has looked at how other jurisdictions
handle absentee ballot requests and what solutions other
jurisdictions might have developed.
MS. GLAISER said she recently attended a meeting in Washington
D.C. and learned that many states were overwhelmed by the voter
registration process than by the absentee ballot process.
Concerns regarding fraud and voter caging were common. Comparing
the Alaska system with that of other states is difficult because
the systems aren't similar.
SENATOR ELTON stated that in the last election the number of
absentee ballot requests and the number of people who voted an
absentee ballot was astounding. In addition, voter turnout was
larger than any previous election. The concerns expressed are
valid, but it's important to find a solution that doesn't
diminish the ability to get absentee ballot requests sent out
without placing an additional threshold in front of a voter that
would make it more difficult to participate. Many people did
vote in the last election and he attributes that to party
building and activating voters. Everyone is concerned about
voter confidentiality, but a solution to the problems that arose
shouldn't reduce absentee voting in future.
4:18:04 PM
MS. GLAISER agreed and said Alaska voters are fortunate to have
the number of avenues available to them. Lt. Governor Leman
worked with Senator Lincoln on special advanced ballots for
rural Alaskans. Alaskans in the military and stationed overseas
also applied for the special advance ballots. Alaskans voted
early, and by fax, and special needs voters had ballots hand
delivered. The Help America Vote Act was also a great help to
uniformed personnel stationed overseas.
4:20:01 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT remarked that it's likely that many states
would look to Alaska for how to develop a system to encourage
participation, but the problems that arose need to be addressed.
MS. GLAISER added that voters should be protected and
participation should be encouraged.
4:20:25 PM
SENATOR HUGGINS reported that his son had a little difficulty
with his absentee ballot, but was very pleased with the help he
received from the Division of Elections.
MS. GLAISER agreed that her staff worked hard.
CHAIR THERRIAULT referenced an earlier question from Senator
Elton and stated that AS 15.60.010 (22) and (23) has a general
description of a political party or group that applies unless
it's otherwise specified in the chapter.
CHAIR THERRIAULT noted that Annette Kreitzer was online. He
asked her to describe her discussions with the Alaska Democratic
Party (ADP) regarding the form they sent out and the issue of
the applications that were returned to the ADP P.O. Box. In
addition he asked her to explain what it means to cage voters.
ANNETTE KREITZER, Chief of Staff to Lieutenant Governor Loren
Leman said Ms. Glaiser had done a good job in describing what
happened. She wasn't sure where the phrase caging voters
originated, but she interprets it the same as Ms. Glaiser. She
added that the Lt. Governor has spent considerable time and
effort on legislation designed to protect voter privacy rights.
4:24:06 PM
When the Lt. Governor first became aware of what was happening,
he sent the head of the ADP a letter on October 8 citing AS
15.20.081. After speaking with the Department of Law, he
determined that the activity was not consistent with the text or
the spirit of that provision of law.
In his letter he outlined his concerns and directed that all the
applications be delivered to the Division of Elections promptly
for processing. They were very concerned about the time gap
between the time the ADP received the applications and the time
they were delivered to the division for processing. He was also
concerned about the privacy of the application and the fact that
card stock was used and the information could be viewed by
anybody.
The Lt. Governor asked the ADP whether anyone other than the
voter applied stickers with voter addresses and or precinct
numbers. Scott Sterling, chair of the ADP, responded that when
applications were returned and did not have residence addresses,
that information was added without otherwise altering any
portion of the application. This troubled the Lt. Governor's
office and the Division of Elections because the voter attested
that everything on the form was true yet information was added
after the fact. Lt. Governor Leman was also concerned that no
voter be disenfranchised so they didn't return the applications
to the voters. Rather they asked the Division of Elections to
contact the voters to get the information so they could get
their ballot in time.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked if it was correct that once they made
contact they developed a process whereby a state employee
accompanied the ADP individual to the post office every day to
collect the ballots immediately.
MS. KREITZER said that's what happened.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked for a timeline from when the ADP forms
were first mailed to when the division began using the immediate
transfer system. He also questioned how many requests came in
and what the data was used for.
MS. KREITZER stated that the Lt. Governor asked a series of
questions including how much time had elapsed between picking up
the cards and delivering them to the Division of Elections. Mr.
Sterling's letter of 10/13/04 said that about one week passed
before the first absentee ballot requests were turned in, but
she wasn't sure of the number. After that, he stated that they
were turned in as they were received. In the same letter he said
they applied stickers when there was no residence address so the
forms were in their possession for at least that long.
4:30:01 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked if anyone asked whether the data was
photocopied or whether the information was entered into a
database.
MS. KREITZER said they didn't get answers on that point and the
Lt. Governor decided not to press the issue since it was clear
that legislation was necessary.
4:30:43 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked whether she would provide the committee
members with copies of the correspondence that went back and
forth.
MS. KREITZER said she'd do so by the next day.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Glaiser whether she had anything to
add.
MS. GLAISER said the division was concerned about the
supplemental information because there is no assurance that the
residence information that the ADP added was correct.
4:32:13 PM
SENATOR ELTON posited that the voter addresses were from the
Division of Elections database. He agreed that the concern is
valid, but wondered whether any voter complained about the
stickers that were added. He said he appreciates the way the
division handled facilitating voters in voting and assumes that
whoever applied the sticker thought they were facilitating as
well.
MS. GLAISER replied the voters didn't know because the Lt.
Governor and the division elected not to have a controversial
political exchange. When the division sent letters out they
didn't assess blame. The driving force was to get ballots to the
voters.
4:34:09 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT stated that the issue was handled appropriately
at the time, but he believes that if voters were contacted now
and told that their application was changed after they certified
that the information was correct, some would definitely be
upset.
MS. GLAISER remarked that voters certainly would have been upset
if the division had taken punitive action and hadn't processed
the applications.
4:35:12 PM
SENATOR HUGGINS remarked that the issue is disturbing and it
can't happen again because it's unfair to voters.
4:36:02 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT questioned whether it appeared that there were
batches of applications that looked as though they were delayed
longer than others.
MS. GLAISER replied the Lt. Governor asked the same question and
she decided that tracking the information would take time away
from processing applications. She elected to shoulder the
responsibility and have her staff work on processing
applications. She did have an employee pull all stickered or
altered applications so that managers could make decisions.
Whenever they could call voters and get the correct information
they did so. It's perfectly all right for someone to fill out
most of the application and have a voter to apply his or her
signature and is no different than a party generating a
preprinted application.
The Lt. Governor supported her decision to process applications
as quickly as possible rather than to spend time and labor
tallying irregularities to bolster their position in the end.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked whether she had all the altered
applications in her possession.
MS. GLAISER said she did.
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked her to elaborate on the issue of the
prepaid registrar envelopes.
4:38:48 PM
MS. GLAISER explained that the Division of Elections provides
postage paid envelopes to the regional election offices to
expedite the return of registration forms. The ADP generated
form was returned to the party first; the party then used the
prepaid envelopes and returned the applications to the regional
office in Anchorage. That slowed processing down because the
regional office date stamped the envelopes and sent them on to
the director's office via DHL. She has no way of knowing how
long it took for the applications to transit from the initial
mailing point to the ADP postal box, but it took between three
and five days for the applications to move from ADP to the
Juneau office if there were no glitches.
Although they didn't complain, it was very frustrating for her
and her staff because they take the voting process very
seriously and this was completely outside their control.
CHAIR THERRIAULT outlined issues to consider:
· Whether there should be a penalty.
· Confidentiality - If entities are allowed to send out
applications, should voter information be concealed?
· Voter registration cutoff date is now seven days and the
director asked for consideration for 10 days.
· Whether forms should have pre-approval - This could include
return to only the Division of Elections. It could also
include type size, shape, shaded areas, type of paper
stock.
· Possible separation of voter registration from the absentee
ballot.
MS. GLAISER said that for protection the form should be folded
and mailed back to the Division of Elections. That could be
placed in regulation. With regard to separating the voter
registration and the absentee ballot, she advised that Alaska
law says that an absentee ballot application acts as a voter
registration form. She didn't know whether there were federal
guidelines as well.
CHAIR THERRIAULT pointed out that if someone went to the
Division of Elections to register to vote, they wouldn't get an
absentee ballot in the mail. However, a number of voters did get
surprise absentee ballots in the mail, which caused them to call
the division and question what was going on.
MS. GLAISER said some forms were better than others and she
would like the division to pre-approve forms so that data entry
isn't compromised. A great deal of work goes into developing the
forms and it's for naught if parties and other entities don't
build on that effort. Communication with the division would make
for a better process.
4:44:05 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT asked whether there were other issues to
address to make the process better.
SENATOR ELTON asked whether he could infer that the Division of
Elections could adopt the guidelines for what the request form
would look like in regulation without statutory authority. That
would include confidentiality and the kind of information
requested.
MS. GLAISER replied the kind of information requested is in
regulation. Current law says that the residence address is
required, but that wasn't on the ADP form.
SENATOR ELTON reversed his question and asked what kind of
information can't be requested.
MS. GLAISER said she isn't an attorney, but she views statute as
supreme and then comes regulation. With that in mind, she has
tried to have everything in statute and not have regulation
completely separate. Currently, statute says, "by mail to the
director of the Division of Elections." She continued to say:
If the policy makers say go do it in regulation, I
guess the Executive Branch has something to say about
that too about whether in fact it should be a change
to statute first - enhanced with regulation - more
specifics made in regulation - If you want to talk
about glares, font and everything, but I think pre-
approved by the Division of Elections - we saw that
until this year everything was going fine. When other
entities chose to do drives, when other entities took
a state form to the fair, everything was working fine.
This was the first year where the flags went up and
something needs to be done differently.
4:46:42 PM
CHAIR THERRIAULT stated that he intended to hear the bill again,
hopefully for final action, in two weeks. He held SB 36 in
committee.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Therriault adjourned the meeting at 4:47:00 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|