By Jon Faulkner
Alaskan Republicans have a winning issue on election reform, and a reliable advocate in Representative Sarah Vance. While Democrats are distancing themselves from unpopular Biden-era laxity over illegal immigration and voter eligibility, our Republican President and Congress are poised to pass the SAVE Act and to address flaws in Federal election law. Alaska has an opportunity to do the same.
The best opportunity we have is Senate Bill 64. True, the bill is sponsored by Bill Wielechowski, but one legislator does not define the merits of proposed legislation, nor does he alone control the means to improve it.
The present version of this bill is almost identical to the one sponsored by Senator Mike Shower and Representative Sarah Vance last session. Thus far, little has changed in the bill.
Democrats tried to force “kill-pill” amendments into the bill during the final hours of session, forcing the sponsors to withdraw it. Democrats may try the same thing again. Republicans, however, should pre-empt these shenanigans by calling out their antics, by securing favorable amendments in committee, and firm “yes” votes as the final bill makes it to the floor.
Republicans control both houses in Alaska, so leadership is accountable for getting election reform done. Trump and Congress appear aligned on federal reforms so there is no reason for progress to stall here in Alaska. Instead of criticizing SB 64 for what COULD happen, Republicans need to seize this opportunity to eliminate fraud and opportunities to cheat. Alaskans deserve this.
If partisanship does not explain the impasse on election reform in Juneau, there could be another explanation: union grip over the legislature. As SB 64 progresses, all eyes are on who is really pulling the strings, and why.
Regardless of the cause, criticism about SB 64 tilting the playing field against Republicans rings hollow. By numerical advantage, they possess the power to do something about it; measured by political will, they do not. Evidence suggests that the Republican playing field has its own “tilting problem.”
The legislature does not lack a good election reform bill; they lack transparency. Few seem able to champion neutrality in election law, let alone structure it. Even fewer call out union pressure tactics. Who dares articulate the baseline principles that distinguish Republican solutions from those of Democrats? That SB 64 could possibly favor one party over another is not the most pressing issue facing Alaskans.
Repealing ranked-choice voting must happen, but quashing election reform will further erode voter confidence. Forfeiting this opportunity will not help fill a power vacuum, or restore party loyalty, or reverse the political urgency of top conservative legislators to quit their job to save Alaska from Biden-like policies. District 6 Republicans, where I vote, do not regard Louise Stutes or Gary Stevens as reliable Republicans, based on their voting record. And yet, they control the legislative agenda, so Republicans will see how they lead on this issue.
SB 64 contains numerous fixes that address voter fraud. The bill creates strict rules and annual audits to clean up voter rolls. It imposes rigid ballot tracking standards; implements data security and mandatory notification of data breaches; and enacts bi-partisan measures like poll worker pay and a rural election liaison sworn to uphold the law.
In advocating for SB 64, Representative Vance is defending the current bill as hard-won and as representing the best opportunity for Alaskans to achieve meaningful bi-partisan reform. Republican allies, however, seem hard to come by.
Some complain about tribal IDs in lieu of driver’s licenses, hunting licenses, or bank statements. However, this is Alaska: many village residents have no need for such licenses on tribal lands. Tribal IDs satisfy federal requirements for Bureau of Indian Affairs eligibility tracking, so they can confirm voter identity. Speculation that SB 64 somehow increases voter turnout among Democrats in the bush simply because “it’s designed that way” seems defeatist at best — at worst, opposing increased voter participation.
Speculation that PFD applications expand the opportunity for voter fraud through “auto registration” are also without merit. Artificial intelligence and government-controlled databases can be trusted to spot identity theft and fraud. Rather than fear this technology, Republicans should embrace it.
There are deficiencies in the bill. Examples are the “clarity” of residency determination that invite subjectivity, like an “articulable and reasonable plan” to return to Alaska; or removing the requirement to sign absentee ballots in the presence of some person of standing. Drop boxes are clearly problematic.
The accelerated release and daily updates of absentee ballot data during ballot processing appears “transparent” but it’s a privacy invasion. How does notifying the world of my absentee ballot request not violate my privacy? Complaints that these “real-time” disclosures favor union-backed campaigns conducting targeted outreach during ballot curing are understandable, but do not honor neutrality; the rule will apply evenly.
The legislature should strip from the bill everything unrelated to the mechanics of voter registration and prosecution of fair elections, such as “true source” disclosure requirement for campaign funding. Such policy does not belong in this bill.
Alaskans should track this bill carefully. Criticism that SB 64 tilts the playing field amounts to gamesmanship — a simple fear that the “other team” could win. To borrow from Teddy Roosevelt, now is not the time to flinch, nor to foul, but to hit the line hard.
