Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
03/28/2017 03:00 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 | |
| HB1 | |
| HJR15 | |
| HB44 | |
| HCR1 | |
| HB175 | |
| HB74 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 44 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HCR 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 175 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 175-US PRESIDENT ELECT. COMPACT: POPULAR VOTE
4:12:42 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 175, "An Act ratifying an interstate
compact to elect the President and Vice-President of the United
States by national popular vote; and making related changes to
statutes applicable to the selection by voters of electors for
candidates for President and Vice- President of the United
States and to the duties of those electors."
4:13:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ZACH FANSLER, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor of HB 175, stated that the proposed legislation has
generated good discussion. He maintained that it is important
that there be an [electoral] system in which everyone has an
equal "say" in the voting process and in which all states
contribute to the process through as much voter participation as
possible.
4:14:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH stated that he is opposed to HB 175; each
vote already counts; and it would diminish the ability of
Alaskans to influence the national election. He maintained that
Alaska has three electoral votes; two of them are U.S. Senators;
and [the current system] gives Alaska an "out-of-balance" impact
on presidential elections. He asserted that Alaska should
recognize and utilize that opportunity as a benefit and not
diminish it through National Popular Vote. He expressed his
belief that National Popular Vote would detract from the
Electoral College approach; it would be bad for his constituents
and for Alaska. He added that in the last presidential
election, if Alaska were a member of the compact, it could have
had a 100-percent vote for the Republican candidate, but the
three electoral votes would have had to be cast for the winner
of the national popular vote. He maintained that result would
have "buried" every Alaskan vote. He reiterated that the
Electoral College is a good process and is good for the state.
4:16:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX expressed that she is conflicted about the
proposed legislation. She stated that from the time she was a
child learning about the Electoral College, she has always
thought the system "weird." She asserted that she would have no
problem supporting a constitutional amendment to eliminate the
Electoral College; however, she expressed that she is
uncomfortable with the prospect of Alaska, through the mechanism
of the compact, having to cast its electoral votes to a
candidate for whom the majority of Alaskans did not vote. She
offered that she supports HB 175 moving to another committee for
further discussion, but she does not want her vote for HB 175 to
be considered as support of the proposed legislation.
4:18:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL stated that he is also conflicted about HB
175. He said that National Popular Vote is a mechanism that
would essentially produce the same result as a constitutional
amendment but without the burdensome process. He relayed that
if enough states join the compact, the country would essentially
choose the President by popular vote. He said the fundamental
question is: "As a nation, do we want to elect our national
leader based on the population of the country, as opposed to 50
individual states and how they break it down?" He suggested
that if one applied this system to the election of the governor
of Alaska, instead of using the popular vote to determine the
winner, the vote would be determined by the results of each
district with each district "weighted" according to its
population. He added that Alaska's districts have equal
populations, but the states do not. He maintained that with
electoral votes being based on population, Alaska has the lowest
possible number of electoral votes - three electoral votes - and
that number is insignificant. He asserted that it is only
through the popular vote that a person's individual vote can
"tip the scale."
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL said that he understands the appeal of using
the results of the popular vote and offered that most
democracies use a national vote count. He mentioned that voters
used to have to be landowners and could not be slaves. He cited
the historical reasons for the Electoral College, which include
counting slaves as three-fifths of a person to boost the number
of electoral votes of the southern states. He suggested that
these practices and historical justifications are antiquated.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL expressed his belief that presidential
candidates would campaign differently if the election was
decided by popular vote. He opined that they would not just
campaign in Los Angeles and New York, because much of the
population live in rural areas.
4:22:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK expressed that he agreed with Representative
Wool. He offered that under President George W. Bush, when the
President and both houses of the U.S. Congress were Republican,
the "stars were aligned" to open the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge (ANWR). He maintained that Alaska does not get the
attention it is due, because it represents only three electoral
votes and is therefore insignificant. He offered that a popular
vote system would encourage Alaska legislators to present a
united front on issues; there is strength in numbers; and Alaska
would get the attention it deserves. He referred to testimony
regarding candidates visiting rural Colorado and attested that
was due to Colorado being a "swing" state. He asked, "When will
Alaska ever be a swing state? When will we ever have the
population density to where we're all of a sudden ...
significant [in] the eyes of these candidates?" He reiterated
that under National Popular Vote, Alaska would attract more
federal campaign money, more focus on Alaskan issues, and more
individual attention to Alaskans. He stated that he supports HB
175 because he believes Alaska would get more attention; it has
big concerns and offers big benefits to the federal government.
He mentioned that Alaska can decide to opt out later if it so
desires. He added that the conditions that led to the Electoral
College are outdated.
4:25:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP stated that he is opposed to HB 175. He
opined that it would not encourage voter participation and
joining a compact disenfranchises voters. He maintained that he
would support a constitutional amendment but believes the
compact is the wrong mechanism.
4:26:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated that she does not support HB 175.
She relayed that she believes in states' rights and the
Electoral College gives Alaska a true advantage in the national
election. She conceded that it is inevitable that the results
of the election are decided before the polls close in Alaska,
but she maintained that does not mean Alaska's votes do not
count. She expressed her belief that using the popular vote [to
decide an election] would be a disadvantage to Alaska and would
disenfranchise Alaska voters. She opined that the United States
has the best elections and the longest history of elections, and
elections in many other countries, even democracies, are fraught
with civil unrest. She asked, "Why are we trying to fix
something that isn't broken?"
4:28:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK moved to report HB 175 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
[AN UNINDENTIFIED SPEAKER objected.]
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives LeDoux, Tuck, Wool,
and Kreiss-Tomkins voted in favor of HB 175. Representatives
Birch, Johnson, and Knopp voted against it. Therefore, HB 175
moved out of committee by a vote of 4-3.