Legislature(2025 - 2026)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/22/2025 03:30 PM Senate 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 | |
| SB116 | |
| SB102 | |
| SB26 | |
| HB121 | |
| SB35 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 26 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 121 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 35 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 116-CAMPAIGN FINANCE, CONTRIBUTION LIMITS
3:48:31 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO.
116 "An Act amending campaign contribution limits for state and
local office; directing the Alaska Public Offices Commission to
adjust campaign contribution limits for state and local office
once each decade beginning in 2031; and relating to campaign
contribution reporting requirements."
3:48:55 PM
JOE HAYES, Staff, Senator Scott Kawasaki, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented an overview of SB 116 and
moved to slide 2:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Why is this bill necessary?
BACKGROUND
In 2021, a federal court ruled that Alaska's lower
than average campaign contribution limits
unconstitutionally restricted free speech. Governor
Dunleavy declined to have the matter reconsidered and
the legislature took no action.
This leaves Alaska's elections vulnerable to unlimited
contributions on state elections by wealthy donors and
having no limit magnifies the influence that these
wealthy individuals have over elected officials.
When money is speech, the average citizen's voice can
be easily drowned out. It's time for Alaska to set
reasonable limits on campaign finance.
3:49:51 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 3 and discussed the diagram showing
Alaska's campaign contributions began with a $1,000 limit in
1974 and now have no limits.
3:50:07 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 4 and explained the chart displaying
the history of campaign contribution limits in Alaska dated back
to 1974, with legislation enacted through the 2021 Advisory
Opinion, followed by the commission's 2022 rejection of the
administrative opinion.
3:50:29 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 5 and discussed the role, the District
Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit),
played in the Thompson v. Hebdon case.
[Original punctuation provided.]
Thompson v. Hebdon
• Plaintiffs sued challenging Alaska's political
contribution limits and aggregate out-of-state
limits.
• The District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals initially upheld the individual limits as
a "sufficiently important state interest" and
"closely drawn" to that end, but ruled the out-
of-state contribution limits were
unconstitutional.
• The U.S. Supreme Court remanded this decision
back to the Ninth Circuit to reconsider their
decision. They urged the Ninth Circuit to apply
the "five factor test" in the Randall v. Sorrell
(2006) decision, which ruled Vermont's $400
contribution limit unconstitutional.
• In 2021, the Ninth Circuit struck down Alaska's
statutory political contribution limits on the
basis that they were too low and had not been
adjusted for inflation since initially
implemented.
3:51:30 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 6 and read the following:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Where are we now?
• In 2021, the Alaska Public Offices Commission
(APOC) issued an advisory opinion under AS
15.13.374 that they would enforce annual $1,500
individual-to-candidate and $3,000 group-to-
candidate contribution limits.
• APOC's staff based the advisory opinion on the
limits established by the Alaska Legislature in
2003 ($1,000 per year for individual-to-candidate
donations) adjusted for inflation.
• On March 3rd, 2022, APOC's five commissioners
voted on whether or not to accept the staff's
advisory opinion. Three out of the five
commissioners voted in support of the advisory
opinion. Four votes were required and so the
staff's advisory opinion was not accepted.
• APOC, in their decision, "implored" the
Legislature to swiftly revisit the state's
campaign finance laws in order to balance the
federal court's order "with the desire of Alaska
voters." So far, despite efforts from proponents
of contribution limits, the Legislature has
failed to reestablish new limits.
• Now, without action by Alaska voters or the state
legislature, Alaska has no individual-to-
candidate limits, out-of-state contribution
limits, or individual-to-group limits, opening
our state and local elections to unlimited
funding from anyone, anywhere in the nation.
3:53:04 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 7 and read the following:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Contribution Limits Legislation Overview
• Reinstates Fair, Reasonable, and Constitutional
Contribution Limits - Reinstates campaign
contribution limits enacted by Alaskan voters.
These limits based on the 2006 limits adjusted
for inflation and the new two-year campaign
period.
• Establishes Per Campaign Period Limits - Limits
to a "per campaign" period, ensuring consistent
limits regardless of election timing or candidate
entry date.
• Are the limits indexed for inflation? - Requires
the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) to
index political contribution limits every ten
years based on inflation, beginning in 2031.
3:53:58 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 8 and read the chart showing the
proposed contribution limits. He said the old limits were $500
per year, increasing to $2,000 per campaign under new
legislation. Group-to-group or non-group contributions rose from
$1,000 per year to $4,000 per campaign, and individual
contributions to a joint governorlieutenant governor campaign
increased from $1,000 to $4,000 per campaign.
3:54:31 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 9 and showed a diagram distinguishing
the difference between individual and group donation limits, and
non-group donation limits.
3:54:42 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 10 and read the contents of the chart
showing the constitutionality of new limits after applying the
"five factor test" from the Randall v. Sorrell decision.
3:55:41 PM
MR. HAYES moved to slide 11 and read the following:
[Original punctuation provided.]
What this legislation achieves
• Makes Alaska's Limits Constitutional - This
initiative brings Alaska's individual-to-
candidate and individual-to-group political
contribution limits in compliance with the
Thompson v Hebdon court decision.
• Reestablishes Limits Alaska's voters support -
This initiative reestablishes the contribution
limits previously enacted by voters in 2006,
adjusted for inflation.1996 initiative garnered
73 percent voter approval, and 85 percent of
those polled supported campaign finance reform.
• Immediate and Narrow - This initiative is an
immediate and narrow solution to the court's
striking down of our voter approved campaign
contribution limits.
3:56:50 PM
SENATOR YUNDT asked if SB 116 would limit campaign donations to
political action committees and independent expenditures, or
only to individuals.
MR. HAYES directed the question to the executive director of the
Alaska Public Office Commission.
3:57:56 PM
HEATHER HEBDON, Executive Director, Alaska Public Office
Commission (APOC), Anchorage, Alaska answered questions
regarding SB 116 and replied that her understanding is the bill
would limit Political Action Committee (PAC) contributions under
[AS 15.13.070(c)] as it falls under the definition of a group.
She said under [AS 15.13.070] the bill would not apply to
independent expenditure groups.
3:58:52 PM
SENATOR YUNDT asked whether SB 116 limits what PAC can give to a
candidate, and does it limit what an individual can give to PAC,
or could someone still make a large donation.
3:59:20 PM
MS. HEBDON replied that SB 116 limits what an individual can
give to PAC, it does not restrict contributions to independent
expenditure groups.
3:59:43 PM
SENATOR YUNDT requested clarification on whether an individual
could still contribute an unlimited amount to an independent
expenditure.
3:59:51 PM
MS. HEBDON replied yes.
4:00:25 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI opened public testimony on SB 116
4:00:38 PM
KEVIN MORFORD, President, Alaska Move to Amend, Chugiak, Alaska,
testified in support of SB 116 and stated that the bill aligns
with a 2026 ballot initiative his organization helped advance.
Passing SB 116 this year would ensure limits are in place before
the 2026 election. Alaskans have historically supported strong
contribution caps, and prior limits were only removed due to a
Ninth Circuit Court decision. SB 116 has been carefully drafted
to address those legal issues and is expected to withstand
constitutional challenges. While it does not regulate
independent expenditures, SB 116 is an important step in
reducing the influence of money in Alaska's elections.
4:03:32 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI asked for elaboration on issues with super PAC's,
noting concerns that large sums of money can flow to them, and
that individual contributions might help counterbalance their
influence.
4:04:09 PM
MR. MORFORD replied that SB 116 does not regulate independent
expenditure because the Supreme Court protects them under the
First Amendment. The bill focuses on contributions to campaigns
and ballot initiatives, where the state has an interest in
preventing corruption or its appearance.
4:05:31 PM
SENATOR YUNDT stated that the Supreme Court has deemed limits on
contributions to independent expenditure unconstitutional, while
the question of limits on individual contributions is still
pending in the Ninth Circuit.
4:06:19 PM
BRUCE BOTELHO, Co-Chair, Citizens Against Money in Politics,
Douglas, Alaska, testified in support of SB 116 and stated that
Alaskans have consistently supported campaign finance limits
since the first limits were passed in 1974. Challenges like the
Thompson v. Hebdon case highlighted that past limits were
unconstitutionally low and lacked inflation adjustments, issues
addressed in SB 116. He said public support remains strong, with
polls showing 65 percent overall approval and higher support in
regions like the Kenai Peninsula and Matsu. Independent
expenditures, protected under Citizens United, have had limited
impact in Alaska, mainly appearing in statewide or local races
rather than legislative contests.
4:11:15 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI asked whether there was any consideration of
including a cap on out-of-state contributions.
4:11:44 PM
MR. BOTELHO replied that the Ninth Circuit struck down the out-
of-state contribution cap, and the Supreme Court did not take up
the issue. Now, both Alaska residents and out-of-state donors
are subject to the same limits, $2,000, or $4,000 for
gubernatorial and lieutenant gubernatorial races.
4:12:39 PM
SENATOR YUNDT asked if the Ninth Circuit established a specific
limit, or set a number, when they sent the ruling back to the
legislature.
4:12:49 PM
MR. BOTELHO answered the Ninth Circuit did not set a number. He
said instead the court left it to the legislature to act on the
guidance, yet the legislature chose not to take action.
4:13:07 PM
SENATOR YUNDT stated his concerned that since no exact number
was given, any limit set could be challenged and potentially
struck down by the Supreme Court, like independent expenditures.
He opined that SB 116 is only a short-term solution and
expressed frustration that candidate donations carry limits
while independents expenditures do not.
4:13:54 PM
MR. BOTELHO replied that the initiative and SB 116 were crafted
with Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit guidance in mind.
Supporters are confident the $2,000 limit is reasonable compared
to other states and will hold up if challenged, with periodic
adjustments starting in the 2030 election cycle.
4:15:03 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN referred to SB 116, page 2, line 5 and said the
language sets a $5,000 annual limit on individual contributions
to a political party or other group. He asked whether
independent expenditure groups or PACs are considered "other
groups" under that wording.
4:15:44 PM
MR. BOTELHO replied that this legislation does not attempt to
regulate independent expenditure groups, as they are governed by
federal rather than state law.
4:15:58 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN asked who represents the "other groups" found
in the legislation.
4:16:08 PM
MR. BOTELHO replied that organizations like the Homeowner's
Associations.
4:16:33 PM
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON asked if the "other groups" means
organizations like Planned Parenthood.
4:16:43 PM
MR. BOTELHO answered yes.
4:17:06 PM
HEATHER KOPONEN, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 116 and stated her belief that it should be one
person one vote.
4:18:08 PM
MERCEDES ARCINIEGA, Outreach and Good Government Lead, Alaska
Public Interest Research Group (APIRG), Anchorage, Alaska,
testified in support of SB 116. She said Alaska currently has no
limits on individual, out-of-state, or group contributions,
leaving elections vulnerable to corruption and outside
influence. Alaskans have historically supported strong limits,
and APOC has urged the legislature to act. She stated that SB
116 reflects voter priorities by reinstating limits with a
provision for inflation adjustments every 10 years, ensuring
they remain fair, effective, and sustainable over time.
4:20:07 PM
HEATHER ARNETT, Board Member, League of Women Voters of Alaska,
Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of SB 116. She said the
League of Women Voters of Alaska supports reasonable campaign
contribution limits to ensure fair competition for public office
and appreciates that SB 116 includes periodic adjustments for
inflation.
4:21:18 PM
MIKE COONS, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 116. He argued it infringes on personal rights
to freely support candidates financially. He contended it won't
reduce outside or independent expenditure funding, and believes
it violates Supreme Court rulings by restricting individuals'
ability to donate as they choose. He emphasized that donations
reflect genuine support for candidates, not vote-buying, and
view the bill as politically motivated rather than protecting
voter interests.
4:23:29 PM
FRANK BOX, Alaska Move to Amend, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 116 and shared his recollection of when and why
the limit was dropped from $1000 to $500.
[CHAIR KAWASAKI closed public testimony on SB 116.]
4:26:41 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI solicited the will of the committee.
4:26:43 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN moved to report SB 116, work order 34-LS0699\A,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal note(s).
4:27:00 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI found no objection and SB 116 was reported from
the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee.