Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
02/11/2025 03:15 PM 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 | |
| HB21 | |
| HB43 | |
| HB4 | |
| HB63 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 43 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 63 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 43-ELECTIONS, VOTING, BALLOTS
3:51:41 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 43, "An Act relating to elections; relating to
voters; relating to the crime of unlawful interference with
voting; and providing for an effective date."
3:52:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CALVIN SCHRAGE, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, presented HB 43 and read the sponsor statement
[included in the committee file], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 43 seeks to ensure that every
eligible Alaskan voter has the opportunity to
participate in Alaska's elections in a safe, secure,
and accessible manner while ensuring valid votes are
not rejected due to minor, correctable errors. HB 43
accomplishes this by modernizing Alaska's elections,
eliminating the witness signature requirement,
creating a ballot curing process, extending early
voting to 30 days before an election, and implementing
same-day voter registration, among other changes.
The purpose of HB 43 is to remove barriers to the
ballot box at every stage of Alaska's election process
while promoting transparency and bolstering the
integrity of Alaska's elections.
3:54:23 PM
ERIK GUNDERSON, Staff, Representative Calvin Schrage, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of the prime sponsor,
Representative Schrage, gave a presentation outlining HB 43. He
stated that the goals of this legislation are to address current
barriers for eligible Alaska voters and clarify the voter
registration process while maintaining the integrity of the
election system.
MR. GUNDERSON discussed key changes associated with HB 43.
These changes include adjusting the voter registration deadline
to allow registration within 30 days of an election; extend
early voting from 15 to 30 days before an election; eliminate
witness signature requirements; establish pre-paid postage for
by-mail absentee ballots; and create a process for voters to
cure deficiencies on absentee ballots.
MR. GUNDERSON stated that HB 43 would allow voters to register
or update their voter registration within 30 days of an
election. For voters who register within 30 days, this bill
would require that they vote by question ballot, special needs,
or an absentee ballot. He said this would provide the Division
of Elections an opportunity to confirm their eligibility and
remarked that this is already allowed by law for presidential
elections. He reiterated that current law allows qualified
voters to vote early at designated stations or absentee in
person locations up to 15 days prior to an election. He said HB
43 would extend this period from 15 to 30 days while eliminating
the term "absentee voting station" and reclassifying it under
the existing category of an early voting station. He explained
that HB 43 would also provide the Division of Elections the
regulatory authority to designate which stations are operated
for persons to vote absentee.
MR. GUNDERSON explained that current law requires that absentee
ballots be signed by both the voter and a witness. He opined
that this creates an additional barrier for many Alaskans,
particularly rural communities and those serving overseas.
Under current rules this does not provide meaningful voter
protection since the Division of Elections cannot certify
signatures and there have been many instances in which these
signatures have been inadequate but still counted. He then
provided a list of the 10 states that require witness or notary
signatures on returned or absentee ballots. He mentioned that
Alaska is one of only 7 states that still require a signature
from a witness for mail-in ballots. Additionally, he remarked
that HB 43 would propose requiring prepaid postage for absentee
by-mail ballots. He then provided a list of 19 states that
require pre-paid postage.
MR. GUNDERSON then proceeded to explain that HB 43 also
establishes a process that allows curing ballots that may have a
missing signature or other mistakes. It would also establish
protocols for the Division of Elections to contact the voter,
explain ballot deficiencies, and how to amend the problems. He
remarked that approximately two-thirds of states require
election officials to notify voters if the ballot is ineffective
and give them the opportunity to cure it.
3:59:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND asked about voter registration changes.
He asked if voters would be able to register on election day.
MR. GUNDERSON responded that yes, registration would be allowed
on the same day of election.
4:00:01 PM
CHAIR CARRICK remarked that ballot curing would be a valuable
tool for insufficient voter identification, and asked Mr.
Gunderson if he could provide an example of what it might look
like.
MR. GUNDERSON responded that even with the elimination of the
witness signature, there are many other reasons a ballot can be
thrown out. He said this can include a missing identifier, a
missing signature, or even putting the date in the wrong place.
He explained that HB 43 would provide channels to help address
these things.
4:01:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked about witness signatures and what
measures under HB 43 would provide for authenticating voters
without a signature. She clarified that she was referring to
absentee, special needs, and all by-mail voting that require a
witness signature. She questioned what protections would be in
place to confirm the voter if the signature requirement were
removed.
MR. GUNDERSON said that there are multiple other protocols
existing in statute. He directed the question to Ms. Beecher.
4:03:00 PM
CAROL BEECHER, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the
Lieutenant Governor, responded that if the witness signature
were removed, the only verification would be the identifiers
that were provided by the voter. Currently, no signature
verification process is in place with state elections.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE mentioned a data breach that affected
130,000 Alaskans that included personal identifiers that are now
on the dark web. She asked whether a bad actor could utilize
this information to obtain an absentee ballot and send it in
while appearing as someone else.
MS. BEECHER responded that it is possible that an individual
could apply for an absentee ballot if they had all the required
information to apply.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that this reason is why she asked
the question regarding additional securities when removing the
witness signature. She asked about the registration expansion
from a 15- to 30-day expansion. She said essentially this would
create "a voting month," and she asked for the justification for
such a change.
4:05:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE responded that this proposal is a
response to the high demand for early voting during the last
election. He remarked that lines up to two hours long were seen
during the last early voting cycle and said that the proposed
bill could improve voting access for Alaskans.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked what the intent was behind the
provision under HB 43 that would change an absentee voting
station to an early voting station.
MR. GUNDERSON responded that this component of the bill was
carried forward in legislation in previous years. It would also
provide the Division of Elections authority to establish early
voting locations where absentee voting can take place. It would
not change the existing process or protocols but rename them.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said she believes that it would make
significant changes. She asked for clarification between an
absentee voting location and an early voting location.
4:08:30 PM
MS. BEECHER responded that by statute, early voting is different
from absentee in-person voting. She said the terminology can be
confusing, but an important distinction is that early voting
occurs only at locations where direct access to voter
registration is possible. She remarked that in 2024 there were
12 early voting stations, and they were opened 15 days prior to
the election. She explained that the absentee in-person voting
locations is a different process and explained the process.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the change proposed under the
bill from early absentee locations to early voting locations
would result in the need for access to voter registration
systems.
4:10:52 PM
THOMAS FLYNN, Assistant Attorney General, Labor and State
Affairs Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of Law,
affirmed that Ms. Beechers remarks on the differences between
absentee and early voting were accurate. He explained that in
practice this would not change absentee in-person voting to
early voting but just extend it.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that this is something that many
committee members were trying to distinguish. She remarked on
voting dynamics in Homer and how it applies to this instance.
She remarked that she foresees that it could create sweeping
changes and have a larger fiscal note. She asked whether the
intent is to change the process of the early votes versus the
early absentee or to change locations as well.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE remarked that the intent was to change
the time period for early voting and simplify the process, not
to complicate it. He expressed that he wanted to work with
committee members to ensure this is written correctly.
4:14:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked what can be expected from ballot
curing provisions and how can it be ensured that all Alaskans
have the same ballot curing opportunities as other cities.
MS. BEECHER responded that currently there is no cure process.
What this bill would do is require the Division to contact the
voter and describe what the issue is with the ballot and then
they would have an opportunity to provide the verifying
documentation to the division. She remarked that a challenge
with rural communities would be the mailing associated with
ballot curing.
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE mentioned the United Postal Service (UPS)
barcode tracking system and asked if this would play into the
bill.
4:16:28 PM
MR. GUNDERSON responded that there has been a good discussion
with the Division of Elections, and the division has flagged
this as an area that could use further investigation to ensure
that it is feasible.
REPRESENTAIVE SCHRAGE, in response, reminded committee members
in thinking about the curing process. He remarked that many
absentee ballots are turned in well ahead of election day which
provides an opportunity to correct the ballots. He also added
that while there might be some disparities with how feasible the
curing process is, especially close to the election day, it is
still an improvement over the current system.
4:19:02 PM
MICHAEL GARVEY, Policy Director, American Civil Liberties Union
Alaska, as an invited testifier, remarked that HB 43 contains
several provisions that the American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) support. These include eliminating the witness signature
requirement and the provision to extend voting to a 30-day mark
to make voting more accessible. He noted that he would like to
focus on the process for creating a ballot curing system. He
said that this is especially important due to a ruling in late
January from the Alaska Superior Court and a lawsuit ACLU and
litigation partners filed in 2022 after thousands of ballots
were rejected for minor errors. He remarked that the Alaska
Superior Court ruled that it was up to the legislature and not
courts to direct the Division of Elections to implement a curing
system. He stated that a valid curing system would help address
real problems and discussed the instances of a rejected ballot.
Based on the Division of Elections report, nearly 800 ballots
were rejected for fixable defects. He noted that many races can
be won from very tight margins. He said it is reasonable to
believe that rejected ballots could increase if no curing
process is established because of regulations that were adopted
in 2024. Additionally, a ballot curing system is not a radical
policy change and it can be done without compromising election
security. Finally, ballot curing will help maintain the
integrity of the election and even increase voter confidence.
He relayed that ACLU asks the committee to advance HB 43 because
of ballot curing and other critical provisions.
4:22:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY mentioned recent ballot rejections in
Western Alaska and asked what the cause of the rejections were
and whether the proposed bill included a remedy.
MR. GUNDERSON responded that he did not have the raw numbers
regarding the primary cause. He said that the witness signature
requirement played a significant factor in ballot rejections.
He reaffirmed that a ballot curing system would help address
this.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE added that in the most recent election
there were 1,303 absentee ballots rejected and 512 of those
ballots had missing witness signatures. He endorsed Mr.
Gunderson's comment that ballot curing would help address the
issue.
4:24:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked Representative Schrage what the plan
was to pay for the changes to the election system.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE responded that the fiscal note is
approximately $160,000, which he said is quite modest given the
context. He said that like anything put forward paying for it
would be a balancing act. He said this would need to be
included in the budget.
4:25:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE cited language in Section 8 on page 4 of
the proposed bill, which read as follows:
(d) A person who claims to be a registered voter,
but for whom no evidence of registration in the
precinct can be found, may vote only an absentee in-
person, special needs, or questioned ballot. The
division may not reject the absentee in person,
special needs, or questioned ballot of a qualified
voter who registers within 30 days before or on the
day of an election on the grounds that the voter is
not on the official registration list for the
election.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said this section corresponds to same-day
voter registration. She asked what protections are in place to
ensure that someone is a qualified voter on election day.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE directed the question to Ms. Beecher.
MS. BEECHER responded that if an individual comes in on election
day to vote and their name is not on the register then they must
vote a question ballot. Then it would go through a review
process to ensure eligibility.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the bill as written suggests that
someone may vote in "absentee in-person, special needs, or
questioned ballot". She asked how this would impact the
verification process to ensure that they are in fact a qualified
voter.
MS. BEECHER responded that they would vote a questioned ballot.
She said the way it would be adjudicated would be the
identifiers and information they provide on the questioned
ballot certification form. This is how the division would
determine voting eligibility.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated that this may be a question for Mr.
Flynn because as this bill is written, it would not prohibit
someone being able to vote absentee or special needs. She said
the standard practice is a questioned ballot she and wanted to
understand how the process would be implemented and verified.
She remarked that what is written will ultimately become law.
MS. BEECHER responded that the current practice of the Division
of Elections and the anticipated practice if the bill passed
would be that if they are not registered to vote then they would
vote a questioned ballot. She noted however, that she could be
wrong and directed the question to Mr. Flynn.
4:28:56 PM
MR. FLYNN added that the Division of Elections still checks
voter qualifications when they vote absentee, in-person, or
special needs.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the distinguishing difference
between a questioned ballot and other ballots is that an
absentee ballot and special needs ballots are verified voters,
but the questioned ballots had not been verified.
MR. FLYNN confirmed that this is a distinction.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that what she is looking at is how the
proposed law is written, and the division would have to honor
it. She said that if an individual is allowed to register on
election day and was not verified, if allowed to vote any type
of ballot, she questioned why there would be a need for distinct
ballots.
MS. BEECHER responded that for the Division of Elections to
implement a same-day registration, it would treat the
certification on the envelope as a voter registration form.
This is what would be looked at to verify information.
4:31:55 PM
MS. THOMPSON said that currently for these types of ballots,
they need to fill out information and verify citizenship, age,
and other information. She described the process of verifying
information pertaining to voting and eligibility to cast a
ballot.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that current practice for someone who
votes an absentee and special needs ballot is that the review
board will look to see if they are on the master register.
However, a questioned ballot does not include individuals on the
master register and warrants an additional review. She asked if
this was accurate.
MS. THOMPSON responded that the questioned ballot would be given
to a voter not on the register for the precinct in which they
are voting. She said it does not necessarily mean that they are
not on a statewide voter registration form somewhere else.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the bill as written would allow
voting registration up to election day. She said that she wants
to ensure that anyone who hasn't registered or has moved
districts is getting a thorough review, and they may not be on
the master register. She said that with the way it is written,
some people could fall through the cracks. She said the bill
writing doesn't coincide with the current process and raised
concerns.
4:35:00 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that HB 43 was held over.