Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
01/26/2012 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB247 | |
| SCR11 | |
| HB77 | |
| HB287 | |
| HB77 | |
| HB287 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 247 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 77 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SCR 11 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 287 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 77-NONPARTISAN BLANKET PRIMARY ELECTION
8:56:29 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was SPONSOR
SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 77, "An Act establishing a top two
nonpartisan blanket primary election system for elective state
executive and state and national legislative offices; changing
appointment procedures relating to precinct watchers and members
of precinct election boards, election district absentee and
questioned ballot counting boards, and the Alaska Public Offices
Commission; requiring certain written notices to appear in
election pamphlets and polling places; relating to declarations
of candidacy and letters of intent; and amending the definition
of 'political party.'"
8:56:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, as joint prime sponsor, introduced
SSHB 77. He said in the early days of statehood, Alaska used
the black line primary ballot, which he explained was a ballot
listing all Republican candidates on one side of the black line
and all Democratic candidates on the other side. Voters could
vote for anyone they chose, as long as they did not cross the
black line. He said that system has come to be known as a
classic open primary. One of the first bills passed by former
Governor Hickel initiated an open primary, which Representative
Gruenberg said was really a blanket primary, in which every
voter could vote for any name on the ballot, regardless of
political affiliation.
9:00:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said most Alaskans highly prize the
right to vote for any candidate, and they had that right until
about 1990, when a former member of the legislature came up with
the theory that the Republicans had a right to close their
primary, which happened by court rule. In approximately 1993, a
man named, Mike O'Callaghan, challenged that court rule in a
case that went up to the Alaska Supreme Court. Representative
Gruenberg deferred further comment to Gail Fenumiai, the
director of the Division of Elections.
9:04:52 AM
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the
Lieutenant Governor, in response to questions, said she is
familiar with SSHB 77 and does not anticipate problems
implementing the proposed law. She related the fiscal note
reflects the reduction in the number of ballots that would have
to be printed during a primary election, resulting in cost
savings of about $34,000 each primary election. She said the
provision in SSHB 77 that would require signage posted, which
would state that designating party preference is a personal
preference, would not create substantial cost to implement,
because the division already posts information in each booth,
and information could be added to that poster. Furthermore, she
responded that she does not see a one-ballot primary style
causing the division any difficulty.
9:09:28 AM
MS. FENUMIAI, in response to Representative Seaton, said the 30-
day requirement language on page 8, [lines 12-24], is existing
language in AS 15.20.190(a). She said the new language in the
bill addresses how candidates would advance to the general
election ballot.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked a question related to the timing of
primary and special elections and how that would affect the
division.
MS. FENUMIAI responded that she had received SSHB 77 late the
previous night, and she requested time in which to research an
answer for Representative Seaton.
9:11:29 AM
LIBBY BAKALAR, Assistant Attorney General, Labor and State
Affairs Section, Civil Division (Juneau), in response to
Representative Gruenberg, said she has reviewed the following
U.S. Supreme Court cases: Washington State Grange v. Washington
State Republican Party and California Democratic Party v. Jones.
She stated that to the extent the proposed legislation is
similar to the Washington State Grange case, it would survive a
facial First Amendment federal challenge.
9:13:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON noted that there is language on page 18 of
the proposed legislation, which he said seems to eliminate no-
party candidates in the general election. He asked if that
would have legal implications for Alaska.
9:14:37 AM
MS. BAKALAR responded that she is not prepared to answer at this
time, but offered to get back to the committee with an answer.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON requested an analysis from the Department
of Law (DOL).
MS. BAKALAR, in response to Chair Lynn, indicated that she would
be able to provide the analysis.
9:15:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would invite Alpheus Bullard,
the bill drafter, to be present to answer questions, if the bill
was heard again by the committee.
9:15:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he thinks the constitutional issues
being discussed should be vetted in the House Judiciary Standing
Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to Representative
Johansen, confirmed that currently, a registered Republican
cannot vote the Democrat primary ballot and a registered
Democrat cannot vote the Republican primary ballot. He
continued as follows:
Anybody can vote in ... the open ballot, even if
you're a Republican. If you're a member of another
party, you cannot vote in the Republican ballot; you
can't go back and forth. The Republican can ...
choose one or the other; if you're a member of another
party, you cannot choose the Republican ballot.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked who decides whether or not
undeclared or nonpartisan voters can vote in the Republican
primary.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG answered that it was the Republican
Party that made the rule that allows nonpartisan and undeclared
voters to choose one or the other ballot. In response to a
follow-up question, he confirmed that the Democratic Party could
make the same decision; political parties have a constitutional
right to do so. In response to a follow-up comment, he
confirmed that in the general election, any [registered voter]
can vote for any candidate on the ballot.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if someone not affiliated with a
party can file for election and run for State House.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if anyone can vote for that person
in any election.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would need to ask Ms. Fenumiai
to answer that question.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN questioned why the joint sponsors of
SSHB 77 would not want to allow a political party to control who
is going to represent them. He said he does not understand the
basic motivation for the proposed legislation.
9:20:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG responded as follows:
The primary election determines who will represent the
party. This changes it into a nonpartisan primary.
The reason for that ... is because that's the only ...
legal way to have a truly open ballot under the First
Amendment right of association of the party. The two
U.S. Supreme Court cases ... read together stand for
the proposition that if the primary determines who the
top vote getter for the Republicans and the top vote
getter for the Democrats are - if that's the way it's
set up - the parties have a constitutional right to
determine the method of electing their
representatives. Only if the primary election is
nonpartisan can everybody get a ballot and vote back
and forth whoever they want to. In that case, it is
no longer a creature of the party, but it's a creature
of the people. And our goal here ... is to restore to
the greatest possible extent the right of the people
to vote for anybody they want to. ... The reason for
that is because many races are decided in the primary.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG concluded that the joint sponsors
believe it is the right of the people to have that choice in
their hands and that to give them that choice is constitutional.
He noted that 60 percent voted in favor of this legislation in
California.
9:24:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN observed that while this is a subject
that is being touted as nonpartisan, in the last fifteen
minutes, there have been press releases and Twitter and Facebook
references to "this" as being "a huge priority of the
AlaskaDemocrats.com."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he was not aware that the
Democratic Party had taken a position [on this issue].
9:25:20 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that SSHB 77 would be set aside.
HB 77-NONPARTISAN BLANKET PRIMARY ELECTION
9:29:58 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the committee would return to
discussion of SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 77, "An Act
establishing a top two nonpartisan blanket primary election
system for elective state executive and state and national
legislative offices; changing appointment procedures relating to
precinct watchers and members of precinct election boards,
election district absentee and questioned ballot counting
boards, and the Alaska Public Offices Commission; requiring
certain written notices to appear in election pamphlets and
polling places; relating to declarations of candidacy and
letters of intent; and amending the definition of 'political
party.'"
9:30:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SHARON CISSNA, Alaska State Legislature, as joint
prime sponsor of HB 77, said in the 1990s, she was the
Democratic co-chair alongside a Republican co-chair of Alaskan
Voters for an Open Primary (AVOP), and Representative Gruenberg
was the group's attorney. She said she witnessed the numbers of
people in the 1990s crying for the right to express the
independence of Alaskans. She said recently she has been
hearing a constant request for an open primary. She related
that some of her constituents have switched parties in order to
vote on the closed ballot in primaries to shift the outcomes.
She said, "It really works straight against what maybe a
majority wants." She opined that an open primary would
represent the people.
9:35:05 AM
CHAIR LYNN said he thinks bills related to elections are the
purview of the House State Affairs Standing Committee, and it is
not uncommon for any bill heard by the committee to "wander into
the purview of other committees ...."
9:35:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN said he has been contacted by
constituents angry that they were being restricted in terms of
which ballot they could use, and those constituents did not want
to switch parties to vote the other ballot. He echoed the
previous remark that Alaskans are independent in how they
register and vote, and they do not like to be restricted in any
way. He relayed that several of his constituents have told him
that they do not vote in the primary election anymore, because
their selection has been restricted. He opined that it is
important to get voters to the polls, not only in the general
election, but also in the primary election.
9:37:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA, in response to Representative Johansen,
said the Republican co-chair for the aforementioned AVOP was
Bonnie Jack.
9:38:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to Representative
Johansen, offered an historical background regarding the
aforementioned AVOP court case. He mentioned Washington and
California as two states that have led the way in open primary
legislation.
9:44:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his understanding that the problem
that SSHB 77 tries to address is a situation in which two
candidates from one party end up running for an office. If, for
example, the candidates are both Republican, then a person who
votes a Democratic primary ballot will not have any say. He
said that has been a frustration that some of the people in his
district have expressed. He said he understands the issue, but
said he is not sure this is the way to [resolve it].
CHAIR LYNN ventured the debate is that political parties have
the right to choose their own representatives without people who
are not part of that party "getting into the mix."
9:47:33 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that SSHB 77 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 04 HB077-OOG-DOE-1-22-12.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 77 |
| 01 SCR 11 - Bill.PDF |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 11 |
| 02 CS for SCR 11 27-LS0774 Version M STA.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 11 |
| 03 UPDATED SPONSOR STATEMENT SCR 11 2012 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 11 |
| 04 SCR 11 - Day of the Arctic Article.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 11 |
| 05 SCR 11 - Iceland Letter.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 11 |
| 06 SCR 11 Fiscal Note 1-24-2012.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 11 |
| 1 HB0247A Copy of Bill.PDF |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 2 HB 247 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 3 HB 247 Relevant Statutes.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 4 HB 247 Guard article.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 5 HB 247 Guard State Press Releases.PDF |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 6 HB247-DOA-FAC-1-21-12.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 7 HB247 MLV Fiscal Note.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| 01 HB 287 Version B (1).pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 287 |
| 02 HB 287 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 287 |
| 03 HB 287 Sectional Summary.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 287 |
| 04 HB287-OOG-DOE-1-22-12.pdf |
HSTA 1/26/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 287 |