Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/11/1996 03:32 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 211 VOTER REGISTRATION & ELECTIONS
CHAIRMAN SHARP brought up HB 211 as the next order of business
before the Senate State Affairs Committee. He called the sponsor's
representative to testify.
PATTI SWENSEN, Aide to Representative Con Bunde, prime sponsor of
HB 211, stated HB 211 would do five things:
1) Require the names of inactive voters to be maintained on the
official voter registration list;
2) Authorizes the preparation and distribution of the voter
registration list;
3) Requires the Division of Elections to purge deceased voters
monthly, and convicted felons promptly;
4) Increase communications from the Division of Elections to
absentee voters and to questioned ballot voters after the primary
regarding the status of their vote;
5) Prohibits the appointment of any state employees to the data
processing review board.
Number 445
SENATOR LEMAN asked what type of information people who purchase
voter lists will receive.
MS. SWENSEN responded they can receive active and inactive under HB
211.
SENATOR DONLEY thinks one of the biggest problems relating to
elections right now is allowing ballots that come in after the
election date to be counted. He does not think that other states
allow ballots that arrive after the date of an election to be
counted.
MS. SWENSEN stated she hasn't heard of a problem with that.
Number 480
DIANE SHRINER, Division of Elections, stated the division supports
HB 211, with the exception of two sections. She stated a letter
was submitted to the committee outlining the concerns of the
Division of Elections. The division has no problem with expanding
the voter registration lists available to candidates. But in some
precincts, adding inactive voters to the official register
available at the precincts could add as many as 2,000 voters.
Until we bring the state law into compliance with the National
Voter Registration Act, we are not presently purging or clearing
any voters from the roles, and haven't done so in several years.
It's been approximately four years since any voters have been
removed from the roles. The division thinks it would be confusing
to never remove voters from the roles. The Division of Elections
has just processed over 26,000 registrations through the permanent
fund dividend applications. Approximately 13,000 of those did
contain address changes.
Number 515
MS. SHRINER stated the other section the division is concerned with
is Section 9. If we were to send a written summary of the reason
for the challenge of all partially counted ballots, which occurs
when someone votes outside their precinct or district, that could
be very discouraging. The division does take Representative
Bunde's concerns seriously.
SENATOR LEMAN thinks that at any given time, the information on the
voter list for his district has a 20% inaccuracy rate.
SENATOR DONLEY suggested limiting sending permanent fund dividends
to addresses where people were registered to vote; you would
probably get really accurate information.
MS. SHRINER noted the Division of Elections thinks that it probably
has attracted a lot of people who think they aren't going to get
their permanent fund dividend if they don't update voter
registration information.
CHAIRMAN SHARP stated one of the most frustrating things for people
is having to vote a challenged ballot because they're not on the
voter registration lists. He thinks it would be beneficial to have
an inactive list to accommodate a voter in that situation.
Number 562
SENATOR DONLEY asked if the division has a position on modifying
the absentee voting process, as far as a cutoff date for counting
ballots.
MS. SHRINER responded the history of that is that Alaska is remote
and we have a great number of overseas voters and the mail is not
very reliable. Part of the reason for extending the deadline for
receiving absentee ballots is to ensure that ballots mailed by the
deadline are actually received. Ballots must be mailed by the date
of the election, but are counted if they are received within
fifteen days after the election.
SENATOR DONLEY asked if the division has a position on whether they
like those rules or not.
MS. SHRINER replied that has not been addressed this year.
Number 585
SENATOR LEMAN asked if voters would be purged after two election
cycles or two years.
MS. SHRINER responded that SB 182 and HB 349 would change that from
two years. But two years is not in compliance with federal law,
and we are moving to comply by making it four calendar years, or
two general election cycles.
TAPE 96-28, SIDE B
MS. SHRINER stated people's names are not purged from voter
registration lists after four years if they simply haven't voted,
but only if the division has had no contact at all with them in
four years.
Number 580
JED WHITTAKER stated he has a problem with Section 1 of HB 211. He
thinks that most citizens like to complain about politicians, but
they don't accept responsibility for informing themselves. He
doesn't think it's too much to ask that a citizen register to vote
and occasionally vote. He thinks having inactivated voters on the
list could create the potential for fraud. Mr. Whittaker also has
a problem with Section 10. He thinks the language is broad. The
Data Processing Review Board should have a representative from
every political party, not just two political parties. He
commended Representative Bunde for addressing the inadequacies in
Title 15. He also suggested conducting elections by mail. Mr.
Whittaker thinks ballots should be counted at the precinct and at
the computer tabulation level.
Number 530
MIKE O'CALLAGHAN stated there is a fundamental problem with
elections in the State of Alaska. The court recently declared that
the 1992 and 1994 primaries and subsequent elections were conducted
illegally. According to information from Bob Motznik, Joe Swanson
allowed 1,543 people to vote illegally in the last election. Those
names were purged from the voters roles as inactive. State law
specifies that the Division of Elections purge inactive voters
after two years, and the division has no authority to do anything
other than what the law dictates. The law also specifies that if
a person's name has been purged, they must re-register 30 days
prior to the next election in order to be eligible. The director
allowed these votes to be cast as contested ballots, and they were
counted. As we all know, Knowles won by 500 votes. He has a
problem with that.
MR. O'CALLAGHAN stated it is important that with the National Voter
Registration Act there is no purging. Under that law, no names can
be purged from any voter list. He thinks that is a fundamental
violation of state's rights in conducting elections. He encouraged
a more restrictive application, which is allowable under law. He
thinks names should be purged from voter registration lists.
Certainly they could be kept on a separate list. Regarding Section
10, there were significant problems with the Data Processing Review
Board during the last election. Three days prior to the election,
the top three people on the state-wide board were Division of
Elections employees. He sees a conflict of interest in having
division employees overseeing the data processing. So he is glad
to see that a state employee may not serve on the board. But he
was discouraged to see that none of the Data Processing Review
Boards across the state were constructed according to law. The
boards don't have any information; the test decks that they run
through the systems are designed by the contractor. He stated
there were significant problems with voter elections in the valley
[Matsu Valley]. When the test deck was run through the system
seven days before the election, they found an error: that error
would have allowed votes cast for one candidate to be counted for
another candidate. Another problem in the valley was the computer
program was checked 24 hours before the election, and they said
there wasn't a problem. However, during the counting of votes, a
problem was found. He stated he knows of other problems, but they
pertain mostly to SB 182, so he will hold that testimony. He
thinks it's extremely important that the purging law be followed.
Number 465
SENATOR DONLEY asked if there is a court case or some other basis
for counting the votes of people who aren't properly registered to
vote.
KATHLEEN STRASBAUGH, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division
(Juneau), Department of Law, replied she doesn't know to which
incident Mr. O'Callaghan is referring. She assumes he was
referring to challenged ballots that were counted with which he
disagreed. The doctrine is that the voter receives the benefit of
the doubt, and the law is interpreted to allow a voter to cast
their ballot.
SENATOR DONLEY asked what the current policy of the division is
regarding purging.
MS. STRASBAUGH responded there is a difference between "inactive"
and "purged". If they're on the inactive list, they would be
permitted to vote. The inactive list is growing increasingly
larger because of a problem with enforcing the current purge law.
It is not true that you cannot purge at all. The federal act is
euphemistic in its' reference to purging, but there is a purging
process, it's just much more involved.
SENATOR DONLEY asked if a person is purged, then their vote isn't
counted, but if they're on the inactive list, then their vote is
counted.
MS. STRASBAUGH stated if they are in the right place and can show
their residency; it isn't just carte blanche.
Number 430
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asked how people registered to vote in his
district could have residence addresses in Palmer, Wasilla, Nome,
and other areas outside his district. He stated that about 10% of
the people registered to vote in his district actually reside
outside the district.
MS. SHRINER replied that the division is not even inactivating
anyone anymore. They are not doing anything until they get some
clarification on the federal law. The division supports having the
voter lists as clean and true as possible.
Number 390
BOB MOTZNIK, testifying from Anchorage, stated that the election in
1994 turned into a royal mess. He repeated some of the problems
related to the committee in writing. The Division of Elections
failed to change the voter registration of many voters who filed
changes long before the deadline for doing so. The Data Processing
Review Board is an oversight board; it's purpose is to determine
whether the Division of Elections did their job correctly. There
should not be any elections staff on that board. It is his
understanding that the test decks that were run were made by the
vendor. In his experience, it is the Data Processing Review
Board's job to test the program, which would mean they would make
the test decks to verify the accuracy, not the vendor. A lot of
these problems were brought out in the court case against the
governor's race. The Attorney General just said, "Oh, everything's
okay." Of course, he was defending the state, so he has to say
that everything is okay. Mr. Motznik thinks that people who took
the time to vote should know if their ballots aren't counted.
Number 330
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS made a motion to discharge HB 211 from the
Senate State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN SHARP, hearing no objection, stated HB 211 was discharged
from the Senate State Affairs Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|