Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 106
02/08/2005 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB90 | |
| Executive Order 113 | |
| HB94 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 90 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 94 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 94-ELECTIONS 8:33:04 AM CHAIR SEATON announced the last order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 94, "An Act relating to qualifications of voters, requirements and procedures regarding independent candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States, voter registration and voter registration records, voter registration through a power of attorney, voter registration using scanned documents, voter residence, precinct boundary and polling place designation and modification, recognized political parties, voters unaffiliated with a political party, early voting, absentee voting, application for absentee ballots through a power of attorney, or by scanned documents, ballot design, ballot counting, voting by mail, voting machines, vote tally systems, initiative, referendum, recall, and definitions in the Alaska Election Code; relating to incorporation elections; and providing for an effective date." 8:33:21 AM LAURA GLASIER, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, directed the committee's attention to a new sectional analysis. She noted that all the highlighted sections appear just as they were in last year's House Bill 523. 8:35:53 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to questions from Representative Gruenberg, reiterated that the highlighted sections would appear exactly as they were in the old bill. She pointed out which sections of House Bill 523 were not included: Section 4 became Senator Guess's Senate Bill 284; Sections 8-11 and 13-15 were part of House Bill 459 by Representatives Harris and Gara; Section 50 became Representative McGuire's House Bill 414; and Section 56 was a report to the legislature due by March 5, 2005, but was not included. 8:39:39 AM CHAIR SEATON asked Ms. Glasier to provide the committee with a list of those items that were not included. 8:39:45 AM MS. GLASIER turned to Section 8, regarding Independent presidential candidates, and offered details. [Sections 1-7 had previously been reviewed before the committee by Ms. Glasier during the 2/3/05 House State Affairs Standing Committee meeting.] 8:40:46 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to a question from Representative Gatto, explained that current statute doesn't allow for Independents to run on a ballot, and Section 8 would change that. 8:41:37 AM MS. GLASIER directed attention to Section 9, regarding ballot counting, and noted that the word "assure" was changed to "ensure". She offered details on Section 10, regarding early voting. She noted the changes specified in Section 11, regarding absentee voting by electronic transmission, and Section 12, regarding absentee voting by mail and electronic transmission. 8:45:08 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would be offering an amendment regarding power of attorney to allow a general power of attorney. He noted the use of the word "specifically" on page 3, line 8, and language on page 4, lines 16-17, and page 7, lines 14-16. He said he would be offering an amendment in those places and any others that specifically authorize another person to apply for an absentee ballot on behalf of another person. 8:46:45 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to Representative Gruenberg, said there is no other language in the bill that specifically requires a special power of attorney. In response to a question from Chair Seaton asking if the division has any problem with changing from a special power of attorney to allowing a general power of attorney, said the Department of Law suggested "this route." She indicated that whatever would assist the voters would be best. 8:47:14 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if a person would be covered if he/she didn't know a general power of attorney was sufficient and got a special power of attorney. 8:48:36 AM MS. GLASIER offered the following: This section of statute would allow someone with a power of attorney -- a case that I can speak to is a mother who had general power of attorney for her son who was serving overseas, and she couldn't make a change to his address or mailing address and he was in special forces and could not make contact with the division ... and didn't have access to a voting officer. 8:49:11 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG summarized, "So, this would also allow the person with the power of attorney to register the absent voter." 8:49:25 AM CHAIR SEATON clarified that Representative Lynn wanted to ensure that the specificity of Representative Gruenberg's [upcoming] amendment includes a general or specific power of attorney, so that one would not preclude the other. 8:49:36 AM MS. GLASIER turned to Section 13, regarding absentee voting by mail and electronic transmission. In response to a question from Representative Gatto, she explained that although Sections 11 and 13 look similar, the one deals with AS 15.20.081, while the other deals with AS 15.20.066. 8:51:28 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to a question from Representative Gatto regarding signatures in remote locations, offered examples, including people who are in remote logging camps and can't get a witness. 8:52:19 AM MS. GLASIER returned to the sectional analysis and offered details on: Section 14, regarding absentee voting by mail and electronic transmission; Section 15, regarding "by mail" voting; and Section 16, regarding standards for voting machines. 8:54:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, regarding Section 16, spoke of the possibility of offering an amendment that would make voting available in other languages in appropriate areas only - specifically Yupik and Spanish. 8:55:36 AM MS. GLASIER addressed Section 17, regarding qualifications for Independent candidates for President and Vice President, and the selection of electors. 8:56:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked what the rationale was for making a requirement for Independent candidates that would not be applied to other candidates. 8:56:26 AM MS. GLASIER said the idea was not proposed by the committee, but was formulated during a committee meeting, and she deferred to Representative Gruenberg for further details. 8:56:57 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would look into that. 8:57:19 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to a follow-up question from Representative Gardner regarding why an Independent candidate would ever be treated differently, explained that the other parties have bi-laws filed with the division and have filed in the state, whereas often Independent candidates aren't from Alaska. 8:57:52 AM CHAIR SEATON noted that [last year's House State Affairs Standing Committee] had decided that this would be a way to maintain contact with the person. 8:58:34 AM MS. GLASIER turned to discussion of Section 18, regarding the interpretation of votes cast, Section 19, regarding duties of electors, Section 20, regarding petitions and the form of the applications, and Section 21, regarding petitions and designation of sponsors. 9:01:56 AM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS mentioned a cruise ship ballot initiative regarding head tax and an investigator that was hired to validate signatures. He asked how "a change like this" would "affect that process." 9:02:35 AM MS. GLASIER indicated that this change wouldn't affect the process whereby someone checks signatures. She explained, "This is an internal mechanism for the division when you're doing the data entry, to have ... two things - a printed name and a date of birth - helping to ensure that you can qualify that signature." The bill does not include any provision to investigate whether all the signatures are true. 9:04:00 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to a request from Chair Seaton, defined "sponsor" as the first group of individuals that sign a petition where law sets out that there shall be at least 100 qualified voters. She added, "Those are usually considered the sponsors, and then three are usually named as a committee." This bill would make no changes as to the number of sponsors required or committee number. 9:04:43 AM MS. GLAISER, in response to a question from Chair Seaton, walked through the application process for a petition and when the date of birth would be required. She noted that one concern that's been heard is how it will be possible to discern if people were actually registered voters when they signed a petition, or if they were registered only by the time the booklets were submitted. 9:06:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said he respects the division's efforts to use the "lowest common denominator" to allow people to participate. Notwithstanding that, he expressed concern that adding another qualifier may perhaps be adding a chance that someone may not qualify if they forget to fill out one of them. He noted that the four qualifiers would be: signature, name, address, and date of birth, and he asked if someone would be disqualified if he/she only answered three out of four. 9:07:25 AM MS. GLASIER said that person would be disqualified; however, having the date of birth could help identify a person better if, for example, his/her signature is not recognizable and the address is barely legible. She added that the division believes that asking for the date of birth is less intrusive than asking for a person's social security number. 9:08:45 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said if it's true that a person who forgets to include his/her date of birth would be disqualified, then he shares Representative Ramras's concern. 9:09:09 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if voting information is private. He speculated that if the information given on an initiative is given to someone who is determined to overthrow an initiative, they would have access to some very private information. 9:10:17 AM MS. GLASIER said the address, name, and whether the person is qualified as a signatory is available information. Regarding date of birth, she said that usually numbers are better than the written word. 9:11:43 AM CHAIR SEATON said he can see why giving date of birth would help the division qualify more signatures. He also said he could foresee how someone may see a date on the line above and just put today's date rather than a date of birth and, thus, be disqualified. He stated that he is not certain where he would like to weigh in on this issue, because it's not clear-cut, and it requires balance. He suggested that the committee think on the issue until the next meeting. 9:14:00 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to a question from Representative Gardner, reiterated that the name, address, and whether or not a person is qualified, are the only things that the division releases. In response to a question from Representative Gatto, she confirmed that that information is released in a report through the division's database. 9:16:03 AM MS. GLASIER, in response to further questions from Representative Gatto regarding the previously mentioned cruise ship ballot initiative, explained the steps that the division takes to ensure privacy. 9:17:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS interpreted that the division is trying to identify real people and eliminate fraud. 9:18:22 AM CHAIR SEATON said many people's signatures are not legible, thus the number of identifiers are limited. If a person goofs and puts his/her mailing address, rather than the required residential address, that is another qualifier that's lost. 9:18:53 AM MS. GLASIER noted, "Actually, in current law, we don't even have the printed name to work with. We get a signature and address on an application, which does make it difficult for us." The bill would add both the date of birth and the printed name. 9:19:41 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked how the division identifies a duplicate signature. 9:20:01 AM MS. GLASIER said during the data entry review and process, a signature will show as duplicate. She said there's no penalty, because people do forget. 9:21:00 AM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS asked how long it takes to qualify all the signers for an initiative and what some of the other qualifiers in other states are. 9:21:23 AM MS. GLASIER said she is not familiar with the other state's qualifiers, but she said she believes the division has 60 days to process a petition. 9:21:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS remarked that the division works hard and it must take a long time to qualify so many signatures. He asked what the failure rate is regarding those signatures. 9:22:31 AM MS. GLASIER said she would have to find out from her staff and get back to Representative Ramras. 9:23:08 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that when a person registers to vote, he/she puts down a variety of identifiers, including the last four digits of the social security number. He opined that the policy of state should be to try to count a signature if at all possible, but he wants to be certain that people don't sign twice. Representative Gruenberg suggested choosing other forms of identification. 9:24:48 AM MS. GLASIER pointed out that the date of birth will always be consistent, whereas other forms may not be. 9:25:26 AM MS. GLASIER returned to discussion of the sectional analysis. She highlighted Section 22, regarding petitions and preparation of petitions. 9:26:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG turned to page 11, line 4 and noted that there is an addition of the phrase "the statement of" before "warning". He said he thinks that's good. 9:27:14 AM MS. GLASIER turned to Section 23, regarding petitions and qualifications of circulators; Section 24, regarding petitions and withdrawing names from petitions; and Section 25, regarding petitions and certification of circulators. 9:28:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked why anyone who is a resident of the state should be excluded from signing a petition. 9:29:28 AM MS. GLASIER said it's a policy call. She offered her understanding that the reason that a person has the ability to carry a petition without being registered has to do with the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation. She said the division's database only includes registered voters. 9:32:22 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN said he has problem with a nonvoter forcing other people to vote on an issue by passing a petition around. 9:33:31 AM CHAIR SEATON clarified that the person who is not qualified to vote is allowed to go around and ask qualified voters to sign a petition. 9:34:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said his concern, as one born and raised in Alaska, is that so many people from outside of the state come in with petitions. 9:35:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to page 11, line 19, of the bill, which read as follows: (3) a resident of the state as determined under AS 15.05.020. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would pass around a copy of that part of statute, if anyone was interested to see it. 9:36:11 AM MS. GLASIER returned to the sectional analysis and reviewed Section 26, regarding petitions and the display of proposed law. She offered details. 9:38:38 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to a question from Representative Gatto regarding language in the bill specifying that the director shall provide each election board with five copies of the proposed law being initiated, explained that that is interpreted as requiring five, but allowing for more than five. 9:39:10 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG spoke of regional voting centers in other states. He explained it's a new concept that lets people vote anywhere in the city, and it's simple, cheap, and easy for voters. He noted that Ms. Glasier was smiling in response to his comments. 9:40:34 AM MS. GLASIER highlighted Section 27, regarding referendums and the form of applications, and Section 28, regarding the referendum and the designation of sponsors. 9:41:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that Section 27 requires that the three designated sponsors must provide their name, mailing address, and signatures, while Section 28 requires that the additional sponsors also provide their date of birth. She asked for an explanation. 9:42:11 AM MS. GLASIER clarified that it was just an oversight on her part; in the printed law, the designated sponsors must also provide their date of birth. 9:42:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked if that should be added to the language in Section 27, paragraph (4) of the bill. 9:42:56 AM MS. GLASIER said it could be added; however, the legal drafters of the bill thought that the way it was written was sufficient. 9:43:28 AM MS. GLASIER returned to the sectional analysis. She reviewed: Section 29, regarding referendums and preparation of petitions; Section 30, regarding referendums and qualifications of circulators; Section 31, regarding referendums and circulation; Section 32, regarding referendums and manners of signing and withdrawing names from petitions; Section 33, regarding referendums and certification of circulators; and Section 34, regarding referendums and the display of the act being referred. 9:46:25 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO, referring to his previous discussion of the number of copies required, opined that it is inconsistent to say a specific number on one line and mean "at least," while using the words "at least" before another number on another line. 9:47:09 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said it's not necessary to make the language the same, but he wouldn't oppose doing so. 9:47:44 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN concurred. 9:48:10 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO moved Conceptual Amendment 1, to add "at least" before any required number of copies [found in Sections 26, 34, and 43]. CHAIR SEATON clarified Conceptual Amendment 1. CHAIR SEATON asked if there was any objection to Conceptual Amendment 1. No objections were stated; therefore, Conceptual Amendment 1 was so ordered. 9:51:31 AM MS. GLASIER returned to the sectional analysis. She highlighted: Section 35, regarding recall and the form of the application; Section 36, regarding the recall and designation of sponsors; Section 37, regarding the recall and preparation of petitions; Section 38, regarding the recall and the statement of warning; Section 39, regarding the qualifications of circulators; and Section 40, regarding recall and circulation. 9:54:06 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO questioned the word "penalties" in Subsection 40 of the sectional analysis. 9:54:33 AM MS. GLASIER explained that it refers to Section 40, [subsection (d)], which read as follows: (d) A person or organization that violates (b) or (c) of this section is guilty of a class B misdemeanor. 9:55:05 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if a person paid a circulator $2, [when Section 40, subparagraph (b) prohibits accepting payments greater than $1], would each dollar be a separate offense? 9:56:12 AM MS. GLASIER said she would defer that question to an attorney. 9:56:47 AM CHAIR SEATON asked Representative Gruenberg to check and get back to the committee at the next meeting regarding that language. 9:57:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he doesn't recall whether class B misdemeanors have a fine. He noted that normally it is a group that distributes petitions, and a group would be considered an organization. Organizations, he continued, are not imprisoned. He said he would review the issue. 9:58:03 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said whenever there's a way for someone to defeat the law, there's someone there to try it. CHAIR SEATON said, "We really need to look at the two potentials and what those could lead to - both the individual circulator, as well as the state." 9:58:26 AM MS. GLASIER responded, "That would appear in initiative and referendum sections of law, as well, so any corrections we make, we want to be inclusive." [HB 94 was heard and held.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|