HB 43-ELECTIONS, VOTING, BALLOTS  3:51:41 PM CHAIR CARRICK announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 43, "An Act relating to elections; relating to voters; relating to the crime of unlawful interference with voting; and providing for an effective date." 3:52:13 PM REPRESENTATIVE CALVIN SCHRAGE, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, presented HB 43 and read the sponsor statement [included in the committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 43 seeks to ensure that every eligible Alaskan voter has the opportunity to participate in Alaska's elections in a safe, secure, and accessible manner while ensuring valid votes are not rejected due to minor, correctable errors. HB 43 accomplishes this by modernizing Alaska's elections, eliminating the witness signature requirement, creating a ballot curing process, extending early voting to 30 days before an election, and implementing same-day voter registration, among other changes. The purpose of HB 43 is to remove barriers to the ballot box at every stage of Alaska's election process while promoting transparency and bolstering the integrity of Alaska's elections. 3:54:23 PM ERIK GUNDERSON, Staff, Representative Calvin Schrage, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the prime sponsor, Representative Schrage, gave a presentation outlining HB 43. He stated that the goals of this legislation are to address current barriers for eligible Alaska voters and clarify the voter registration process while maintaining the integrity of the election system. MR. GUNDERSON discussed key changes associated with HB 43. These changes include adjusting the voter registration deadline to allow registration within 30 days of an election; extend early voting from 15 to 30 days before an election; eliminate witness signature requirements; establish pre-paid postage for by-mail absentee ballots; and create a process for voters to cure deficiencies on absentee ballots. MR. GUNDERSON stated that HB 43 would allow voters to register or update their voter registration within 30 days of an election. For voters who register within 30 days, this bill would require that they vote by question ballot, special needs, or an absentee ballot. He said this would provide the Division of Elections an opportunity to confirm their eligibility and remarked that this is already allowed by law for presidential elections. He reiterated that current law allows qualified voters to vote early at designated stations or absentee in person locations up to 15 days prior to an election. He said HB 43 would extend this period from 15 to 30 days while eliminating the term "absentee voting station" and reclassifying it under the existing category of an early voting station. He explained that HB 43 would also provide the Division of Elections the regulatory authority to designate which stations are operated for persons to vote absentee. MR. GUNDERSON explained that current law requires that absentee ballots be signed by both the voter and a witness. He opined that this creates an additional barrier for many Alaskans, particularly rural communities and those serving overseas. Under current rules this does not provide meaningful voter protection since the Division of Elections cannot certify signatures and there have been many instances in which these signatures have been inadequate but still counted. He then provided a list of the 10 states that require witness or notary signatures on returned or absentee ballots. He mentioned that Alaska is one of only 7 states that still require a signature from a witness for mail-in ballots. Additionally, he remarked that HB 43 would propose requiring prepaid postage for absentee by-mail ballots. He then provided a list of 19 states that require pre-paid postage. MR. GUNDERSON then proceeded to explain that HB 43 also establishes a process that allows curing ballots that may have a missing signature or other mistakes. It would also establish protocols for the Division of Elections to contact the voter, explain ballot deficiencies, and how to amend the problems. He remarked that approximately two-thirds of states require election officials to notify voters if the ballot is ineffective and give them the opportunity to cure it. 3:59:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND asked about voter registration changes. He asked if voters would be able to register on election day. MR. GUNDERSON responded that yes, registration would be allowed on the same day of election. 4:00:01 PM CHAIR CARRICK remarked that ballot curing would be a valuable tool for insufficient voter identification, and asked Mr. Gunderson if he could provide an example of what it might look like. MR. GUNDERSON responded that even with the elimination of the witness signature, there are many other reasons a ballot can be thrown out. He said this can include a missing identifier, a missing signature, or even putting the date in the wrong place. He explained that HB 43 would provide channels to help address these things. 4:01:20 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked about witness signatures and what measures under HB 43 would provide for authenticating voters without a signature. She clarified that she was referring to absentee, special needs, and all by-mail voting that require a witness signature. She questioned what protections would be in place to confirm the voter if the signature requirement were removed. MR. GUNDERSON said that there are multiple other protocols existing in statute. He directed the question to Ms. Beecher. 4:03:00 PM CAROL BEECHER, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, responded that if the witness signature were removed, the only verification would be the identifiers that were provided by the voter. Currently, no signature verification process is in place with state elections. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE mentioned a data breach that affected 130,000 Alaskans that included personal identifiers that are now on the dark web. She asked whether a bad actor could utilize this information to obtain an absentee ballot and send it in while appearing as someone else. MS. BEECHER responded that it is possible that an individual could apply for an absentee ballot if they had all the required information to apply. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that this reason is why she asked the question regarding additional securities when removing the witness signature. She asked about the registration expansion from a 15- to 30-day expansion. She said essentially this would create "a voting month," and she asked for the justification for such a change. 4:05:27 PM REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE responded that this proposal is a response to the high demand for early voting during the last election. He remarked that lines up to two hours long were seen during the last early voting cycle and said that the proposed bill could improve voting access for Alaskans. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked what the intent was behind the provision under HB 43 that would change an absentee voting station to an early voting station. MR. GUNDERSON responded that this component of the bill was carried forward in legislation in previous years. It would also provide the Division of Elections authority to establish early voting locations where absentee voting can take place. It would not change the existing process or protocols but rename them. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said she believes that it would make significant changes. She asked for clarification between an absentee voting location and an early voting location. 4:08:30 PM MS. BEECHER responded that by statute, early voting is different from absentee in-person voting. She said the terminology can be confusing, but an important distinction is that early voting occurs only at locations where direct access to voter registration is possible. She remarked that in 2024 there were 12 early voting stations, and they were opened 15 days prior to the election. She explained that the absentee in-person voting locations is a different process and explained the process. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the change proposed under the bill from early absentee locations to early voting locations would result in the need for access to voter registration systems. 4:10:52 PM THOMAS FLYNN, Assistant Attorney General, Labor and State Affairs Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of Law, affirmed that Ms. Beechers remarks on the differences between absentee and early voting were accurate. He explained that in practice this would not change absentee in-person voting to early voting but just extend it. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that this is something that many committee members were trying to distinguish. She remarked on voting dynamics in Homer and how it applies to this instance. She remarked that she foresees that it could create sweeping changes and have a larger fiscal note. She asked whether the intent is to change the process of the early votes versus the early absentee or to change locations as well. REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE remarked that the intent was to change the time period for early voting and simplify the process, not to complicate it. He expressed that he wanted to work with committee members to ensure this is written correctly. 4:14:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked what can be expected from ballot curing provisions and how can it be ensured that all Alaskans have the same ballot curing opportunities as other cities. MS. BEECHER responded that currently there is no cure process. What this bill would do is require the Division to contact the voter and describe what the issue is with the ballot and then they would have an opportunity to provide the verifying documentation to the division. She remarked that a challenge with rural communities would be the mailing associated with ballot curing. REPRESENTATIVE MOORE mentioned the United Postal Service (UPS) barcode tracking system and asked if this would play into the bill. 4:16:28 PM MR. GUNDERSON responded that there has been a good discussion with the Division of Elections, and the division has flagged this as an area that could use further investigation to ensure that it is feasible. REPRESENTAIVE SCHRAGE, in response, reminded committee members in thinking about the curing process. He remarked that many absentee ballots are turned in well ahead of election day which provides an opportunity to correct the ballots. He also added that while there might be some disparities with how feasible the curing process is, especially close to the election day, it is still an improvement over the current system. 4:19:02 PM MICHAEL GARVEY, Policy Director, American Civil Liberties Union Alaska, as an invited testifier, remarked that HB 43 contains several provisions that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) support. These include eliminating the witness signature requirement and the provision to extend voting to a 30-day mark to make voting more accessible. He noted that he would like to focus on the process for creating a ballot curing system. He said that this is especially important due to a ruling in late January from the Alaska Superior Court and a lawsuit ACLU and litigation partners filed in 2022 after thousands of ballots were rejected for minor errors. He remarked that the Alaska Superior Court ruled that it was up to the legislature and not courts to direct the Division of Elections to implement a curing system. He stated that a valid curing system would help address real problems and discussed the instances of a rejected ballot. Based on the Division of Elections report, nearly 800 ballots were rejected for fixable defects. He noted that many races can be won from very tight margins. He said it is reasonable to believe that rejected ballots could increase if no curing process is established because of regulations that were adopted in 2024. Additionally, a ballot curing system is not a radical policy change and it can be done without compromising election security. Finally, ballot curing will help maintain the integrity of the election and even increase voter confidence. He relayed that ACLU asks the committee to advance HB 43 because of ballot curing and other critical provisions. 4:22:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE STORY mentioned recent ballot rejections in Western Alaska and asked what the cause of the rejections were and whether the proposed bill included a remedy. MR. GUNDERSON responded that he did not have the raw numbers regarding the primary cause. He said that the witness signature requirement played a significant factor in ballot rejections. He reaffirmed that a ballot curing system would help address this. REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE added that in the most recent election there were 1,303 absentee ballots rejected and 512 of those ballots had missing witness signatures. He endorsed Mr. Gunderson's comment that ballot curing would help address the issue. 4:24:36 PM REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked Representative Schrage what the plan was to pay for the changes to the election system. REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE responded that the fiscal note is approximately $160,000, which he said is quite modest given the context. He said that like anything put forward paying for it would be a balancing act. He said this would need to be included in the budget. 4:25:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE cited language in Section 8 on page 4 of the proposed bill, which read as follows: (d) A person who claims to be a registered voter, but for whom no evidence of registration in the precinct can be found, may vote only an absentee in- person, special needs, or questioned ballot. The division may not reject the absentee in person,  special needs, or questioned ballot of a qualified  voter who registers within 30 days before or on the  day of an election on the grounds that the voter is  not on the official registration list for the  election.  REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said this section corresponds to same-day voter registration. She asked what protections are in place to ensure that someone is a qualified voter on election day. REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE directed the question to Ms. Beecher. MS. BEECHER responded that if an individual comes in on election day to vote and their name is not on the register then they must vote a question ballot. Then it would go through a review process to ensure eligibility. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the bill as written suggests that someone may vote in "absentee in-person, special needs, or  questioned ballot". She asked how this would impact the verification process to ensure that they are in fact a qualified voter. MS. BEECHER responded that they would vote a questioned ballot. She said the way it would be adjudicated would be the identifiers and information they provide on the questioned ballot certification form. This is how the division would determine voting eligibility. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated that this may be a question for Mr. Flynn because as this bill is written, it would not prohibit someone being able to vote absentee or special needs. She said the standard practice is a questioned ballot she and wanted to understand how the process would be implemented and verified. She remarked that what is written will ultimately become law. MS. BEECHER responded that the current practice of the Division of Elections and the anticipated practice if the bill passed would be that if they are not registered to vote then they would vote a questioned ballot. She noted however, that she could be wrong and directed the question to Mr. Flynn. 4:28:56 PM MR. FLYNN added that the Division of Elections still checks voter qualifications when they vote absentee, in-person, or special needs. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the distinguishing difference between a questioned ballot and other ballots is that an absentee ballot and special needs ballots are verified voters, but the questioned ballots had not been verified. MR. FLYNN confirmed that this is a distinction. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that what she is looking at is how the proposed law is written, and the division would have to honor it. She said that if an individual is allowed to register on election day and was not verified, if allowed to vote any type of ballot, she questioned why there would be a need for distinct ballots. MS. BEECHER responded that for the Division of Elections to implement a same-day registration, it would treat the certification on the envelope as a voter registration form. This is what would be looked at to verify information. 4:31:55 PM MS. THOMPSON said that currently for these types of ballots, they need to fill out information and verify citizenship, age, and other information. She described the process of verifying information pertaining to voting and eligibility to cast a ballot. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that current practice for someone who votes an absentee and special needs ballot is that the review board will look to see if they are on the master register. However, a questioned ballot does not include individuals on the master register and warrants an additional review. She asked if this was accurate. MS. THOMPSON responded that the questioned ballot would be given to a voter not on the register for the precinct in which they are voting. She said it does not necessarily mean that they are not on a statewide voter registration form somewhere else. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the bill as written would allow voting registration up to election day. She said that she wants to ensure that anyone who hasn't registered or has moved districts is getting a thorough review, and they may not be on the master register. She said that with the way it is written, some people could fall through the cracks. She said the bill writing doesn't coincide with the current process and raised concerns. 4:35:00 PM CHAIR CARRICK announced that HB 43 was held over.