HB 1-REPEAL BALLOT MEASURE 2 VOTING CHGS  3:12:02 PM CHAIR SHAW announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 1, "An Act relating to elections." 3:13:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, Alaska State Legislature, prime sponsor, introduced HB 1. He paraphrased the sponsor statement [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: HB1 repeals Rank Choice Voting and returns to how the State previously ran elections. Rank Choice Voting, which was first used in the 2022 elections, was narrowly approved by voters in the 2020 election. That Ballot Measure was sponsored almost entirely by money from special interest groups outside of Alaska. Petitions for ballot measures are only required to gather signatures from 10% of the previous election's total voter turnout. The timing of the petition was such that it was first used in the 2022 elections. Following the 2022 election cycle, there has been an enormous outcry to repeal it. Many of the complaints were centered around confusion, not understanding the process, not knowing how to support their candidate in a rank choice environment, scared to vote incorrectly and risk hurting their candidates' chances to win, and open primaries, also referred to as jungle primaries. While there are other aspects to the full ballot measure two, there are some items that should stay in effect, and that the courts have ruled unconstitutional if they were to be changed back. Also, there are other portions that attempt to keep dark money out of our election process which were intentionally left out of this legislation, this legislation only effects the rank choice and open primaries part of the new law. 3:16:41 PM RYAN MCKEE, Staff, Representative George Rauscher, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Rauscher, prime sponsor, presented a sectional analysis of HB 1 [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Section 1 Deletes language related to Ranked choice voting and amends the language relating to the appointment of election supervisors. Under amended language a supervisor will be appointed based on the top to votes statewide in the most recent gubernatorial election, or they may be appointed by the election supervisor if a member of either party is not available. Section 2 Amends language relating to the appointment of election watchers. Clarifying the process for precinct party committees when appointing watchers. Section 3 Modifies the appointment of members of the Alaska Public Offices Commission, to be from the top two vote gaining parties from the most recent gubernatorial election. Deleting reference to political groups. Section 4 Deletes reference to "Political Groups" as it relates to the APOC. Section 5 Amends this section by deleting references to Ranked choice voting elections. Section 6 Amends language relating to the filing of campaign reports, adding a new section to include individuals who filed a nominating petition to become a candidate. Renumbers the following sections. Section 7 Amends the statute reference to reelect changes made in bill. Section 8 Modifies the definition of "contributions" to not include mailings describing the political party's slate of candidates. Section 9 Deletes language relating to Ranked choice voting and amends the section requiring ballots to include the political party of candidates. Section 10 Deletes language relating to Ranked choice voting. Adds a new section relating to the counting of votes and renumbers the following sections. Section 11 Deletes reference to ranked choice voting in the certification of ballot counts. Section 12 Amends language to reflect context of bill. Section 13 Amends language for Absentee voting. Clarifying that only the voter of the voter's designee may mark the absentee ballot application. Section 14 Amends language to include special runoff elections. Section 15 - Deletes language related to ranked choice voting and amends the language relating to the appointment of the District Counting Board. Under amended language a board member will be appointed based on the top to votes statewide in the most recent gubernatorial election. Sections 16 - 21 - Amends language to include special runoff elections. Section 22 Amends language to include the traditional primary election and deletes references to "Ranked choice voting." Section 23 Inserts a new section relating to the Participation in primary election selection of a political party's candidates. Section 24 Deletes reference to ranked choice voting and requires the inclusion of the name of the political party affiliation of each candidate. Section 25 Adds a new section addressing how a party may nominate a new candidate should an incumbent become disqualified, incapacitated, or dies. Section 26 This section is repealed and reenacted to establish the preparation and distribution of ballots minus language for ranked choice voting. Section 27 This section is repealed and reenacted to establish how nominees are placed on the general election ballot. Section 28 Amends the section requiring the director of elections to include the full name and political party of a candidate on the general election ballot. Section 29 Amended to require that both a write-in candidate for Governor and Lt. Governor to be of the same political party or group. Section 30 Adds new sections establishing the process for filling vacancies by party petition if a candidate dies, withdraws, resigns, or becomes disqualified from holding office. Section 31 Adds new sections to Article 2, establishing the process for nominating no-party candidates for political office. Including the requirements for filing petitions, form of the petition, and the required number of signatures for both statewide and district-wide offices. Section 32 Deletes reference to ranked choice voting from the sections. Section 33 Deletes language relating to ranked choice voting and makes conforming amendments to the bill. Section 34 Adds a new section establishing the procedures for calling a special election or a special runoff election. Section 35 - Adds a new section establishing the procedures for calling a special with primary. Section 36 Amends the requirements for the governor issuing a proclamation for a special runoff election. Section 37 and 38 Makes conforming changes to allow for special runoff elections for US Senator the US Representative. Section 39 Amends the section by adding the required percentage of qualified voters for a noparty candidates to appear on general election ballot. Section 40 Adds new sections establishing requirements for party petition and selections of party nominees. Section 41 Makes conforming Amendments to the provisions for conduction of special elections and special runoff elections. Section 42 Makes conforming amendments to the conditions and time of callings special elections and special runoff elections. Section 43 - Makes conforming amendments to the conditions holding special elections and special runoff elections. Section 44 Makes conforming amendments to the Proclamation of a special elections by the governor. Section 45 Makes conforming amendments to the petition requirements of a no-party candidate for a special election. Section 46 Adds a new section establishing the requirements of party petition and selections of party nominations for a special election. Section 47 Makes conforming amendments to the general provisions for conductions special elections. Section 48 Makes conforming amendments to the qualifications and confirmations of an appointee to the state legislature following an appointment to office. Section 49 Deletes language relating to ranked choice voting as it relates to filling a vacancy or a part-term Senate appointee or special election. Section 50 and 51 Makes conforming amendments relating to the date and proclamation of special elections to fill a vacant state Senate seat. Section 52 - Makes conforming amendments to the petition requirements of a no-party candidate for a special election to fill a vacant state Senate seat. Section 53 - Adds a new section establishing the requirements of party petition and selections of party nominations for a special election to fill a vacant state senate seat. Section 54 - Makes conforming amendments to the general provisions for conductions special elections to fill a vacant state senate seat. Sections 55 and 56 Make conforming amendments to sections relating to placing propositions on the ballot. Sections 57, 58 and 59 Make conforming amendments to sections relating to the publication of official election pamphlets. Section 60 Makes conforming amendments to the definition of a federal election and deletes language relating to ranked choice voting. Section 61 Makes conforming amendment to the public office financial disclosure report. Section 62 Repeals statutes relating to ranked choice voting. 3:24:11 PM CHAIR SHAW invited questions from members of the committee. 3:24:27 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether the bill would return Alaska Statutes to their existence prior to the passage of Ballot Measure 2 [2020]. MR. MCKEE answered yes. 3:25:35 PM The committee took a brief at-ease. 3:27:04 PM JULI LUCKY, Executive Director, Alaskans for Better Elections, clarified that although she was providing invited testimony, Alaskans for Better Elections was opposed to HB 1. She directed attention to a PowerPoint presentation [included in the committee packet] and proceeded to outline the benefits of ranked choice voting (RCV) on slides 2-3, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: • Fewer barriers to entry for citizen legislature. • Increases competition in the general election, where more voters participate. • Gives all voters a voice in selecting candidates. • A candidate needs broad support to win. ü Encourages candidates to talk to a larger percentage of their constituency. ü Elects representatives that are more accountable to their constituents. • Allows candidates with similar ideologies to compete in the same election without splitting the vote and letting a less popular candidate win with a plurality. ü Allows Alaskans to vote their heart without fear of contributing to their least favorite candidate getting elected. ü More choice for voters at the higher turnout general election. ü Government reflects the electorate. 3:31:33 PM MS. LUCKY discussed what changed in 2022 on slides 4, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: All statewide elections now follow the same, two-step process: STEP 1: Nonpartisan/Open Primary. • All candidates appear on the same ballot; all voters get to choose among all candidates; top four vote- getters move to General. • Unaffiliated voters don't have to choose a ballot and limit their choices 58% of Alaskans are not affiliated with a party. • The most competitive candidates advance. 3:32:01 PM The committee took a brief at-ease. 3:32:49 PM MS. LUCKY resumed the presentation on slide 4 and continued to discuss the changes in 2022 on slide 5, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: STEP 2: Ranked Choice Voting General Election. • Voters rank candidates in order of preference. • If a candidate receives a majority (50%+1 vote) of first-choice votes, they win. • If not, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and voters who ranked that candidate as their 1st choice have their vote counted for their next choice. • This process continues until two candidates are left and the one with the most votes wins. 3:34:09 PM MS. LUCKY proceeded to slide 6, titled "Alaskans Understand RCV," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: In the first RCV election in August: • 99.83% of ballots were correctly filled out. • 73% of voters ranked at least two candidates. In the November election: • Statewide average, 99.94% of ballots were correctly filled out. • Voters were more likely to rank: ü In competitive races; ü In races with multiple candidates; and ü When their first choice wasn't favored to win. 3:35:18 PM MS. LUCKY advanced to slide 7, titled "2022 Alaska Elections Successes," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: • RCV didn't favor one party over another: in the three statewide races, incumbents were favored but the winners represented different points on the political spectrum. • More choice for voters: larger, more diverse candidate pool • Vote-splitting was prevented and candidates had majority support: The three "come from behind" victories show that the system works. • Alaskan voters are complex and independent. The system allows them to express that. 3:37:14 PM CHAIR SHAW invited questions from members of the committee. 3:37:23 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER inquired about the suggestion that "ballots were easy to understand" and asked whether there was data to support that statement. MS. LUCKY reported that over 99 percent of the ballots in one election and 98 percent of the ballots in the other election were filled out correctly. Furthermore, a majority of Alaskans reported that RCV was "simple" in the exit polling conducted after both the August and November elections. She offered to follow up with the requested data. REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked how Alaskans for Better Elections defined "filled out correctly." MS. LUCKY said a ballot that had been filled out with no error was considered "filled out correctly." REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER shared that RCV was a complex subject to communicate to his constituents. He asked how many races were impacted by the voters who decided against ranking the candidates, meaning they only cast a vote for the first round. MS. LUCKY offered to follow up with the requested data. She explained that in every race, some voters chose to express their preference for one candidate only. REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER shared his understanding that in the RCV system, a ballot was "exhausted" when the voter selects only one candidate. He asked how many races were impacted by exhausted ballots. MS. LUCKY offered to follow up with the requested information. 3:43:12 PM REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked how many people selected the same candidate for each round. MS. LUKCY said that would be considered a "spoiled" ballot also termed an "over vote." She reported that there were 342 "over votes" in the August election. REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD inquired about the source of Ms. Lucky's data. MS. LUKCY said the data came directly from the Division of Elections (DOE). REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked how many ballots were filled out incorrectly in both the August and November elections. MS. LUCKY offered to follow up with the requested information. She estimated that roughly 7,000 unwitnessed ballots were thrown out. REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked what election Ms. Lucky was referring to. MS. LUCKY said she was referencing the 2022 election cycle when RCV was in effect. She offered to follow up with the requested information. 3:46:21 PM The committee took a brief at-ease. 3:47:01 PM KELLY TSHIBAKA, Preserve Democracy, directed attention to a PowerPoint presentation [included in the committee packet], outlining the threat of RCV on page 2, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Ranked-Choice Voting is an emerging threat to our election system. It causes: VOTER SUPPRESSION INCREASED NEGATIVITY AND COSTS IN CAMPAIGNS DISTRUST IN THE ELECTION SYSTEM RISK TO THE DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY OF ELECTION OUTCOMES INCREASED VULNERABILITY TO DARK MONEY FEWER CANDIDATE CHOICES MORE EXTREME CANDIDATES BEING ELECTED 3:47:43 PM MS. TSHIBAKA continued to slide 3, titled Alaska's Record Low Voter Turnout," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Lowest voter turnout in state history occurred the year Alaska introduced RankedChoice Voting (RCV). Turnout was 44.4%, down from 49.8% in 2018 and 56.08% in 2014. That is 18,000 less voters than in 2018 and 2014. Even fewer voters participated in the US Senate and House races. Only 40% voted in the federal racesa 10% drop from 2018. 3:48:09 PM MS. TSHIBAKA discussed a graph on slide 4, showing Alaska voter turnout by year. She shared her understanding that in 2022, Alaska had record low voter turnout at 44.4 percent. She noted that Alaska was the anomaly in comparison to the rest of the U.S., which saw some of the highest voter turnout in history in 2022. 3:49:51 PM MS. TSHIBAKA proceeded to slide 5, titled "ACLU Testimony Ranked Choice Voting," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: "Ranked choice ballots have suppressed voter turnout (RCV) has resulted in decreased turnouts up to 8% in non-presidential elections. RCV exacerbates economic and racial disparities in voting. Voting errors and spoiled ballots occur far more often. In Minneapolis, for example, nearly 10% of ranked choice ballots were not counted, most of these in low-income communities of color." --Testimony of Vignesh Ganapathy Kansas Policy Director 3:50:26 PM MS. TSHIBAKA shared quotes from the New York Post and The Amsterdam News on slide 6. She referenced Maine's U.S. Senate race on slide 7, stating that RCV created increased negativity and costs. She discussed a case study on Alameda Country on slide 8, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: • The certified 3rd place candidate was declared the actual winner • After the election was certified, the Registrar of Voters learned its RCV system was not configured properly by FairVote, a special-interest funded organization that has advocated for the spread of RCV for decades FairVote came into Alameda County, reprogrammed the RCV system, and the election results were re-run, producing a different outcome • Led to a recount of every RCV race in the county • "It really feeds into the distrust so many people have in our election system when this sort of thing happens." Jim Ross, SF Chronicle, 12/28/22 3:51:14 PM MS. TSHIBAKA directed attention to slide 9, titled "Ranked- Choice Voting: Ballots Tossed & Winners Get Less Than 50%," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: MYTH Lower ranked candidates are redistributed until a candidate with 50% or more of the vote wins. FACT In 4 jurisdictions using Ranked-Choice Voting, none of the final winners received 46% of the total vote share because over 27% of the ballots originally cast were thrown out as the RCV rounds progressed. Nov. 18, 2014 THE STUDY CONCLUDED: RCV increases the difficulty of the task facing voters. A substantial number of voters either cannot or choose not to rank multiple candidates. Even individuals who mark three distinct choices often face the prospect of exhaustion, so education alone will not fix the problem. The possibility that exhaustion might tip the balance in the final round poses a serious risk to the democratic legitimacy of the method and the outcomes it produces. 3:55:03 PM MS. TSHIBAKA proceeded to slide 10, titled "Ranked Choice Voting Caters to Dark Money," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: In 2022, 75 candidates ran for 3 state-wide offices in Alaska. With Alaska's RCV-related open primary system, the burden was on each voter to research every candidate's background and platform to make an informed decision an impossible task. So, the candidates (incumbents) with the most money (and dark money) had the greatest advantage? and won in all 3 races. 3:56:00 PM MS. TSHIBAKA continued to slide 11, titled "Ranked-Choice Voting Limits Choices," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: In 2020, 6 third-party candidates were on the general election ballot for federal offices in Alaska (not including Al Gross, candidate for US Senate, who ran as an Independent but was on the ballot as a Democrat). In 2022, only 1 third-party candidate was able to make it through Alaska's new RCV-related open primary system to the general election for a federal office. RCV significantly limited the ability of Independents, Libertarians, Alaska Independent Party, and other 3rd party candidates from making it to the general election. 3:57:18 PM MS. TSHIBAKA directed attention to slide 12, titled "Ranked- Choice Voting Eliminates Moderates," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: In Alaska's 2022 U.S. House race, Democrats forced out a moderate Independent candidate, Al Gross, who previously ran as the Democrat candidate for U.S. Senate in 2000. This left only one remaining Democrat in the final 4 general election, Mary Peltola, who held far more extreme political views than Al Gross. Similarly, a moderate Alaska Native Republican dropped out of the final 4 in the U.S. House race after determining she had no path to victory to win the election. A less moderate candidate took the fourth spot on the ballot. 3:58:10 PM MS. TSHIBAKA highlighted bi-partisan opposition to RCV on slide 13. On slide 14, she listed three states that were banning RCV: Tennessee, Florida, and South Dakota. She proceeded to slide 15, titled "Alaskans Want to Repeal RCV," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: 53% OF ALASKANS WANT RCV REPEALED Alaska Survey Research Poll by Ivan Moore January 2023 • Poll of 1,397 registered Alaskan voters shortly after 2022 election • "Everyone who follows me here on [Twitter] knows that I am a huge supporter of RCV, but these numbers show the reality. The original passage of RCV was by a very narrow margin and any idea that 'once we have an RCV election, everyone will love it' is NOT the case." Ivan Moore 4:00:08 PM MS. TSHIBAKA concluded on slide 16, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Passing H.B.1 Will Prevent VOTER SUPPRESSION INCREASED NEGATIVITY AND COSTS IN CAMPAIGNS DISTRUST IN THE ELECTION SYSTEM RISK TO THE DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY OF ELECTION OUTCOMES INCREASED VULNERABILITY TO DARK MONEY FEWER CANDIDATE CHOICES MORE EXTREME CANDIDATES FROM BEING ELECTED CHAIR SHAW invited questions from members of the committee. 4:00:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE ARMSTRONG referred to slide 10, which suggested that RCV catered to dark money, indicating that candidates with the most money had a greater advantage. She pointed out that U.S. Representative Mary Peltola was outspent 10:1 in the general election with zero independent support. She reported that Sarah Palin and Nick Begich had significantly more outside support from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and Rand Paul's Super PAC. She asked where Ms. Tshibaka sourced her data from. Additionally, she asked Ms. Tshibaka to enumerate how U.S. Representative Peltola was a far more extreme candidate than Al Gross. MS. TSHIBAKA shared her understanding that in the general election, U.S. Senator Peltola spent approximately $6 million with up to $10 million in personal expenditures, whereas both Sarah Palin and Nick Begich had approximately $1 million in their campaigns. Further, she reported that the NRCC did not endorse either Nick Begich and Sarah Palin in the general election, nor support them in a big financial way. In regard to extreme policy views, she stated "Some of those are in things like the votes were seeing now, where Mary Peltola voted ? for abortion of a child who's on a patient table separate from their mother after birth." 4:02:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER expressed concern about the argument that the two-party system was the problem and that RCV was needed to level the playing field. He asked which organizations supported candidates who weren't affiliated with a legal political party within the state of Alaska. MS. TSHIBAKA said she was aware of activist groups, environmentalist groups, and special interest groups that were unaffiliated and supporting candidates in 2022. REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked which organizations were supporting Ballot Measure 2. MS. TSHIBAKA shared her understanding that the organizations were listed on the Ballot Measure 2 website. She added that the three major groups were from the Lower 48 and tended to lean to the left politically. 4:04:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked which states were utilizing RCV. MS. TSHIBAKA responded that 31 states had used RCV in some form or another. She offered to provide that list to the committee. REPRESENTATIVE STORY inquired about the data on voter turnout. She referenced an article by the Pew Research Center that found voting turnout to be down nationwide. She asked how Alaska's voter turnout compared to national rates. MS. TSHIBAKA cited a study out of Harvard [University] that showed a collective increase in nationwide voting except in states with tossup seats or contentious races. 4:07:29 PM PHILLIP IZON, Alaskans for Honest Elections, discussed RCV, opining that it was not better, faster, cheaper, nor did it increase voter turnout. He acknowledged the low voter turnout in Alaska, reporting that 2022 was the lowest turnout by percentage in the state's history. He shared his understanding that $6.1 million came from outside Alaska to fund Alaskans for Better Elections, adding that organization only raised $20,000 in state funds. He discussed RCV in the Lower 48, citing various races. He argued that third parties lacked representation in the RCV system. He opined that Democrats "gamed" the RCV system to block Ms. Tshibaka from winning the election. He characterized RCV as a failed system, adding that Alaskans for Better Elections changed its entire marketing campaign to target the open primary, as opposed to RCV, due to its unpopularity in Alaska. 4:17:57 PM REPRESENTATIVE ARMSTRONG pointed out that every single quote and instance referenced by Mr. Izon was from the Lower 48. She inquired about the relevancy of outsiders commenting on RCV; further, she requested examples of such occurrences in Alaska. Citing data from the Division of Elections (DOE), she reported that if every single exhausted ballot had been completed, it would not have changed the outcome of the race, noting that Ms. Tshibaka would have still lost by a significant margin. MR. ISON said he used the examples to avoid "rehashing" the points presented by Ms. Tshibaka, adding that Alaskans were not alone in their experience. He shared a personal anecdote and discussed the difficulties and complexities of the RCV system. He relayed that many individuals across the country had been harmed by the system. 4:22:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE ARMSTRONG addressed the argument that the 5.4 percent drop in voter turnout from 2018 to 2022 was due to RCV; however, from 2014 to 2018, voter turnout dropped by 6.24 percent. She remarked, "It's very convenient to make causation and play with data." She urged people to carefully consider the numbers, adding that she was attempting to correct the misinformation that had been provided on the record. 4:23:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD stated that RCV had failed many people, adding that many people had complained about the system. She urged members not to make accusations against fellow legislators. CHAIR SHAW invited closing comments from the bill sponsor. 4:24:01 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER acknowledged that there was a low decline in voting turnout; however, he recalled that RCV was promoted as a tool to increase voter turnout, which it failed to do. 4:24:46 PM CHAIR SHAW announced that HB 1 bill would be held over.