The Save Act Will Essentially Disenfranchise A Lot Of US Voters

 

One reason I haven't blogged as much as usual:  I'm still having problems loading photos from my to my laptop.  After I chatted with an Apple (allegedly a real person in the Philippines), I got it to work.  But the very next time it didn't again.  Also we were in LA and San Diego for a memorial for a high school friend.  I could have done some quick photo posts, but . . . the airdrop wasn't dropping.  And yes, I could probably load them onto the blog all on the phone, but I haven't tried doing that.  

So Tuesday evening, I brought my Canon camera to the Marston Auditorium to hear about the SAVE Act - presented by the ACLU, the League of Women's Voters, and the Native American Fund.  That camera has an SD card and I have an attachment that lets me plug it into the laptop.

Mara Kimel, from the ACLU introduced the first speaker who had just flown up from LA.  Xavier Presad outlined key problem areas of the Act

What he didn't say, in so many words, but what I took from all the specific issues, was that this is a giant voter suppression act.  Which makes sense coming from this administration and, presumably, the folks at the Heritage Foundation.  They've been worried about the changing US demographics for years. It's why they talk about The Great Replacement Theory. And some folks said 2024 was the last year demographics gave the Republicans a chance to win elections.  Which is why, in part, the president is trying to export a million people.  And import white South Africans.  I'd note that voting by non-citizens is rare, but Republicans seem to want to make people believe it's common, just as they want to make people believe most immigrants are here illegally, are rapits, terrorists, and or murderers.  All to justify flying kidnapped people (citizens and non-citizens) to gulags outside the US.  But this is all my take, not what Xavier said.  

Xavier Presad

Xavier is an ACLU attorney "focused on voting and protecting democracy."  

You can view the SAVE Act here.

Key issues Xavier and the other panelists raised:

1.  People required to prove they are US citizens to register to vote, they'll need:

• birth certificate
• passport

Voters' ids must have names that are the same as the name on their birth certificates, or be able to prove they officially changed their name.  Anyone who has changed their name - adoptees, married women, for example - will need one of the  IDs above to register to vote.  

While Tribal IDs are listed in the ACT, many, if not most, do not include place of birth and a photo. So they won't be valid. 

Real IDs from many states have the same problem.  

A significant number of USians do not have passports and getting a birth certificate takes several weeks at least and costs $15 on up, depending on which state.  So essentially, anyone trying to prove their nationality will have to get started at least a month before an election or they likely won't get their documentation back on time.  

Another section, they said, makes it possible to remove people from the rolls without notification shortly before the election.  So people will show up to vote, thinking they are registered, and won't have any of the documentation of their citizenship.  And won't be able to vote.   See language from the Act below on acceptable ID.  

The panel after Prasad's talk

2.  Registration has to be done in person.  Everyone has to go to an election office to register to vote.  This ends automatic registration for people who get a driver's license and registering online or having people authorized to register people at events or in front of the supermarket.  For Alaska, it ends automatic voter registration when you apply for a Permanent Fund dividend.  This puts a much bigger burden on election offices and on people who do not live near election offices.  Alaska has only 6 Election Offices - Juneau, Anchorage, Fairbanks, Nome, Wasilla, and Kenai, which is a satellite office of the Wasilla office.  This will make it much harder for rural Alaskans, on or off the road system, to register.  Ir would even act like a poll tax for those who have fly to register.  People in Tok would have to drive to Wasilla or Fairbanks.  And they have to be there during office hours, so it could mean taking off work.  

3.  

Panelist Heather Annett, League of Women Voters

Criminalization of poll workers

People who do not appear on the precinct rolls who say they are registered but do not have proper identification (proving they are US citizens), can be given a provisional ballot to vote.  But the SAVE Act makes it possible to criminally prosecute a poll worker and carries up to five years in prison. 

This seems like it's designed to discourage poll workers from giving provisional ballots.  It also seems to be a way to intimidate potential poll workers.  If you look at the list of acceptable ID's how can an election worker be sure they are authentic, or that the state seal is authentic, or that it was filed with the office responsible to for vital statistics?  Finding enough poll workers is already a problem due, in part, to harassment by GOP voters.

4.  Unfunded Mandate.  The Constitution gives the States some control over elections

Panelist Kristen Gerbatsch,
Native American Rights Fund

"Article I  Legislative Branch

Section 4 Congress

Clause 1 Elections Clause

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

Congress has the power to make changes.   

But the bill doesn't authorize any funding for the massive changes states will have to make to the ways they register voters, check for proof of citizenship, and training for staff and poll workers on all the new regulations.  I couldn't find a cost estimate, though I believe one of the speakers did give one. 

Panelist Riza Smith, Action Alaska, Vet

5.  Costs for people (especially rural folks) to register.  This was alluded to in the section 2 - in person registration, but needs to be emphasized for Alaskans, many of whom live off the road system.  They will have to fly or take a ship to get to a location that has an election office.  And while some people may visit one of the six towns with an election office during the year, they have to go to the office during regular working hours.  So weekends are out.  For many this will require taking off work.  If they're, say in Anchorage, for medical care, getting to the election office to register could be a real burden.  A large number of the people living off the road system are Alaska Natives.  For example:

Kayak ad for Anchorage to Dutch Harbor flight
$1408 round trip

The SAVE Act passed the House on April 8, 2025.  It goes next to the Senate.   Conservatives have been eroding Voting Rights for a while.  Shelby County v. Holder began a wholesale attack on voting rights.

Appendix 1:  Acceptable ID

From the SAVE Act as of April 10, 2025 after passage in the House:

(1)

A form of identification issued consistent with the requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates the applicant is a citizen of the United States.

(2)

A valid United States passport.

(3)

The applicant's official United States military identification card, together with a United States military record of service showing that the applicant's place of birth was in the United States.

(4)

A valid government-issued photo identification card issued by a Federal, State or Tribal government showing that the applicant’s place of birth was in the United States.

(5)

A valid government-issued photo identification card issued by a Federal, State or Tribal government other than an identification described in paragraphs (1) through (4), but only if presented together with one or more of the following:

(A)

A certified birth certificate issued by a State, a unit of local government in a State, or a Tribal government which—

(i)

was issued by the State, unit of local government, or Tribal government in which the applicant was born;

(ii)

was filed with the office responsible for keeping vital records in the State;

(iii)

includes the full name, date of birth, and place of birth of the applicant;

(iv)

lists the full names of one or both of the parents of the applicant;

(v)

has the signature of an individual who is authorized to sign birth certificates on behalf of the State, unit of local government, or Tribal government in which the applicant was born;

(vi)

includes the date that the certificate was filed with the office responsible for keeping vital records in the State; and

(vii)

has the seal of the State, unit of local government, or Tribal government that issued the birth certificate.

(B)

An extract from a United States hospital Record of Birth created at the time of the applicant's birth which indicates that the applicant’s place of birth was in the United States.

(C)

A final adoption decree showing the applicant’s name and that the applicant’s place of birth was in the United States.

(D)

A Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a citizen of the United States or a certification of the applicant’s Report of Birth of a United States citizen issued by the Secretary of State.

(E)

A Naturalization Certificate or Certificate of Citizenship issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other document or method of proof of United States citizenship issued by the Federal government pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act.

(F)

An American Indian Card issued by the Department of Homeland Security with the classification ‘KIC’.

Appendix 2:  State Requirements in the Act

(3)

State requirements  [this is only partial]

Each State shall take affirmative steps on an ongoing basis to ensure that only United States citizens are registered to vote under the provisions of this Act, which shall include the establishment of a program described in paragraph (4) not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this subsection.

(4)

Program described

A State may meet the requirements of paragraph (3) by establishing a program under which the State identifies individuals who are not United States citizens using information supplied by one or more of the following sources:

(A)

The Department of Homeland Security through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) or otherwise.

(B)

The Social Security Administration through the Social Security Number Verification Service, or otherwise.

(C)

State agencies that supply State identification cards or driver’s licenses where the agency confirms the United States citizenship status of applicants.

(D)

Other sources, including databases, which provide confirmation of United States citizenship status.

I'd note, that the Privacy Act of 1974 requires all agencies that collect personal information from citizens and non-citizens to state on the document how that information will be used.  The agencies are not allowed to share that information with anyone or any agency not listed.  This would be a complete violation of the Privacy Act.  

The Save Act has not been passed by the US Senate. It appears that it will face obstacles in the Senate.  But the more people express their opposition the easier it will be for GOP senators to oppose the bill.  You can contact your US Senators here.

The Coup Is Happening But Media Aren't Treating It That Way

There's a coup happening in DC.  There's no other way to describe it. 

The president is nominating and the Senate is approving candidates whose basic qualifications are loyalty to the president. 

He's illegally firing employees and  shutting down federal funding to the states.  

He's implemented 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada.  

The Republicans in the Senate are approving his nominees.  

He's fired all the heads of agencies that deal with airline travel and safety, then blamed two crashes on Biden, women,  and people of color.  The new N word is DEI.  

He's fired a large number of federal attorneys and FBI agents.  

He's wiping out all traces of programs that work for justice for people who aren't white hetero males.

His unelected, unapproved, honorary vice president (some argue the true president) Elon Musk has slipped into key agencies and people are worried he's collecting data for his own business uses and other nefarious purposes.

Gutting important health and other websites.

He's released water from a dam in California that was being saved up for when it's needed in the summer.  

This is just a tiny fraction of the acts he's taken.  

Even if Congress stood up to Trump, he would simply ignore them and do what he wants.  Who is to stop him?  (I'll try to address this question in another post.)

What seems to drive his decisions?  There seem to be four key factors, though readers can probably think of others:

• Getting everyone to focus on Trump.  He just can't deal with being ignored or criticized
• Punish those who don't kowtow to his whims
• Whip up the fear and anger of his supporters
• Reward his wealthy supporters

No mainstream media mention coup yet

While the main media outlets might mention his actions, none that I've seen have put it all together and called it a coup.  When I google Trump coup - everything that comes up is about January 6, 2021. Cyber coups are as easy to convey visually as military coups.  

But on social media, people are starting to call this what it is.  Here are just a couple of examples:

From Bluesky/ was bustling with coup references today.

"But the longer we fail to recognize the current situation for what it is—a slow-rolling coup attempt—the longer it will take for us to recover."

A privatization coup of the US government?

[image or embed]

— David Corn (@davidcorn.bsky.social) February 1, 2025 at 3:25 PM

Not just a coup but a coup by a corrupt Putin- and Nazi-aligned foreigner. Too bad we no longer have a real DOJ.

— Andrew Wallingford (@andrewwallingford.bsky.social) February 1, 2025 at 2:02 PM

Another step in the coup & Trump still doesn’t realize Musk has taken charge.

[image or embed]

— Dana Houle (@danahoule.bsky.social) February 1, 2025 at 10:00 AM

https://spoutible.com/. didn't offer as many examples when I searched for 'coup'

Even on Musk's own Twitter people are calling it a coup

We are in the middle of a fast moving putsch, a right wing authoritarian coup, a five alarm fire, and our media are treating it as if it were a little backyard bonfire.

— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) February 1, 2025

If this isn’t a coup d’etat, I don’t know what is. Someone not elected to office is methodically taking full control of the United States government. pic.twitter.com/zxUMcsFv8G

— Senator Scott Wiener (@Scott_Wiener) February 2, 2025

Elon Musk is staging a coup. Was that not clear? https://t.co/AcCNI1caNK

— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) February 1, 2025

Democrats are still talking about winning the 2026 Congressional races, as if there will be free and fair elections.  But Trump's team has studied all the possible ways to disenfranchise opposition voters and ways to game the electoral process, I can't imagine that the next elections will be conducted with a fat thumb on the scales.  

At the moment, most people are living pretty much the way they were six months ago.  Except for dark skinned immigrants, pregnant women with complications, LGBTQ folks, people are still going about their lives relatively normally.  

They haven't grasped that soon they will be affected.  Maybe when disaster funds are withheld, or people they work with disappear, or their health care or social security are sharply reduced or disappear.  

But most authoritarian governments in world history end.  Some faster than others.  Find ways to resist in your community - whether it's joining a group, contacting your federal representatives on a regular basis, confronting disinformation when you hear it, and many other ways.  Here's Robert Reich's list of ten things to do to resist.  

I'd note Reich reminds people to find joy in their lives - get out and appreciate the beauty of nature, of art, music, a meal with family and friends, play with your pets.  

This Lady Has Put It All Together For You

 A good, clear, emphatic explanation of why people need to vote every election for Democrats.  She explains how the government works for people who don't seem to get that presidents can't do most things without Congress.  How the Supreme Court can also stymie and president, especially the one that the Federalist Society has stacked in favor of the rich and against most people - especially people of color and women.  

It won't take long and it will seem to go by faster because of how she presents it.  

This is one to share with others, particularly those who don't vote cause "it's not their thing."    

Poll Working - And Peltola Does Well

 Yesterday was primary election day in Anchorage.  It was a beautiful sunny day and I biked over to Kasuun Elementary school (and passed the 1200 km mark for the summer so far). 

It was basically unremarkable.  People came, showed ID, got their ballots, voted in a voting booth, then brought the ballot to the voting machine where it was scanned.

None of the ballots were rejected by the scanner. (In 2022, the first time we had ranked choice voting, the machine did reject some of the ballots.  But the screen explained why - usually the person had voted for more than one person with the same ranking.)  

But this election was simple.  One US Congress seat.  One state house seat.  And in some districts there was also a state senate seat.  

After the ballot was scanned, voters got a choice of Alaska themed "I Voted" stickers.  

I did notice that the scanner was touchy.  Most people had a bit of trouble getting the scanner to suck in their ballot.  I'm not sure what the people who got it scanned in right away did differently from the others.  

But I did discover, toward the end, that if voters turned the privacy sleeve (with the ballot inside) upside down, then took the blank side of the ballot out of the sleeve and put it into the slot on the scanner, it went in with no problem.  (They scan from either end of the ballot, whatever side is up.)  Because the ballot choices were so few, the backside of the ballot was blank.  So no one's votes were visible. That won't be the case in November.  

There were also four first time voters I got to congratulate - three young men and a young woman.  Maybe there were more, but I wasn't aware.  Okay, some will ask how I was aware, so here's how.  The first two were very young looking and I just asked, "You're not a first time voter are you?"and they smiled and said yes.  The parents of the other two alerted me.  

On the negative side, the turnout was really low.  Not sure exactly what the percentage was, but we had over 2000 registered voters on the list and when we finished the scanner said that 294 had voted.  If we round it off to 2000 total (and there were more than that) 200 votes would be 10%.  300 votes would be 15%.  But then I don't know how many people voted by mail.  That's easy to do.  At least four people dropped off their mail in ballots, which go in the box with the questioned ballots and don't get scanned.  

Actually, I can figure this out more precisely.  I looked up the Division of Elections page for House District 12.  

My estimate wasn't pretty close.  I said 300 would have been 15% if there were 2000 voters.  There were 2174 registered voters and the turnout was 13.53%.  Not an impressive number.  The chart also lists 117 Absentee voters and 438 early voters.  But that's for the entire district, not just the one precinct. I would have thought there were more.

I'd also note that when I left there was a discrepancy in the numbers.  The number of voters listed on the rolls (they are highlighted in yellow and sign their name) was 293.  And when the counted all the questioned and special needs ballots and the checked the ballot stubs, minus the spoiled ballots, that came out to 293 as well.  I'd helped take down the voting booths and putting away other things and since I was biking, I wanted to take off and asked if I was needed further and so I left without finding out how the discrepancy was resolved.  But these counting issues come up every year and the training program spent a fair amount of time on this. 

The whole house district voted for the NON incumbent, with a 14.11% voter turnout.  I assume that NON refers to non-partisan.  The Division of Elections page on parties lists N as non-partisan.  Schrage has been part of the House Coalition comprised of Democrats and most Republicans.

The whole Senate district gave the Democratic incumbent a plurality.   

And of more interest, I assume, to non-Alaskan readers, voters gave Democratic US House of Representatives member Mary Peltola 50.38% of the vote in a 12 way race!  The two major Republican vote getters were Alaska Republican Party endorsed candidate Nick Begich with 26.98%, and Trump and major Congressional Republicans supported candidate Nancy Dahlstrom with 20.01%.  

Remember, this is an open (all candidates together) primary and the four top candidates go on to the general election which will be ranked-choice.

The turnout in the Congressional race was also low - 15%.  As impressive as winning a majority in a 12 person race with two well supported  Republicans, the general election, being a presidential election, will have a lot more voters.  While she may not win a majority in the first round, Peltola is in a good position to win enough second place votes to pull 

Nick Begich had promised to drop out if he was in third place behind Dahlstrom.  Dahlstrom made no such commitment.  

In 2022, many who voted for the top Republicans as their first choice vote, gave Democrat Peltola their second place vote.  Not another Republican. I would say this is a good sign for the Democratic House elections.  

One final note - House District 18, which includes two military bases, had less than 5% turnout.  Ouch.  

Election Worker Training

 Last Thursday I went to training for election workers for the primary (August 20) and the general election in November.  This is another effort on my part to contribute to a fair election.  

There was a morning training at 9:00am and I opted for the afternoon training at 1pm.  I also dropped off our absentee ballots since the training was at the elections office on Gambell.  Plus there was early voting going on too.

The door to the training room was closed - the morning training was going on longer than scheduled.  By 1:30 people came out and we went in.  

The trainer, who had done the morning training, stayed to do ours.  She was there for four and a half hours already and then started our training - which took a little over four hours - without a break.  

There was a training manual which covered things like getting things set up the night before (mostly signs and tables and things that didn't need security), set up in the morning (starting at 6am to be ready to open at 7am), then how to work the various stations - 

• checking names on the register, 
• giving out the ballots, 
• questioned ballots (if the name isn't on the register or no ID or other irregularities) 
• disabled voting procedures (including a large screen for voting with audio and manual controls in braille and other touch sensitive controls), 
• special needs voters
• the voting machine for scanning the ballots
• spoiled ballots

Those are most of the topics that were covered.  I went through election training in 2022, but that was during COVID and it was all online.  

Some things I learned:

1.  Questioned ballots - anyone that has any irregularity - they aren't on the register, no ID, at the wrong precinct, or basically any situation where someone insists on voting when they aren't clearly eligible (ie coming after the polls close).  We were told that all questioned ballots will be examined by election officials and they will determine if the vote should count.  

Since the questioned ballots are in special envelopes with the voters name and info on them, I asked about what we say if they ask if people will know how they voted.  The answer was that there's a clear procedure for sorting questioned ballots by what will be counted first.  If they vote out of their district, they won't get to vote for the local candidates, but will get to vote for US House, for example.  Then the ballots, still in the secrecy sleeves, are taken out of the envelopes, so the ID is gone.  Later they get put through the appropriate scanner.  

2.  Special Needs Voters - these are people who cannot come to the polls for any reason.  A representative comes and fills out a form on an envelope, gets a ballot, goes to the voter, lets them vote and fill out the rest of the form.  The representative has to sign again after the ballot is filled out and bring it back to the polls.  Who does this?  People in nursing homes was an example, but they also mentioned a busy chef who couldn't leave the restaurant.  The ballot has to be returned by 8pm election day and the form has to be filled out correctly, including the representative's second signature.

It seemed to me that for most situations, it would be far easier for everyone to get a mail in ballot.  There's less to fill out and less running around.  This certainly would be a better option for the nursing home people.  The only people this makes sense tome for, are people who are incapacitated at the last minute.  Say someone who tests positive for COVID the night before the election.  It also seemed to me that this option is ripe for abuse. 

3.  Tracking Ballots.  There are lots of measures to insure that all the ballots are accounted for.  The pads with the ballots have numbers on them (but not the ballots when they are torn out of the pad).  The scanners count the number of ballots inserted successfully.  All that has to be tallied against the registered and the number of questioned ballots and special needs ballots and spoiled ballots (torn up because the voter made a mistake.)  But that still leaves the possibility of someone playing with card in the voting machine.  There are paper ballots that could be counted to see if they match what the machine says, but the state doesn't really test many if any precincts to check.  

4.  The training was thorough.  More than most people can digest in the four plus hour training.  The manual is a backup, but doesn't have all the information we were given.  Our trainer knew her stuff thoroughly.  I'm hoping that the others I work with will remember the things I missed or forget.  

5.  There was additional training for people who will be in charge of the equipment - like the voting machines and the touchscreens.  

6.  There's a number to call if there are non-English speakers to connect to someone who, hopefully, speaks the voter's language.  It wasn't clear how many languages are available.  There are no interpreters for the hearing impaired.  

Fundraisers - Great Way To Meet Candidates - Also Get Your Mail In Ballot Soon

 Our mail in ballots came several days ago.  The primary is August 12.  It's an open primary - all the names will be on the ballot and the top four (if there are that many)
will go on to the ranked choice ballot at the November general election.  

Anchorage has moved to vote by mail, so everyone gets ballots sent.  

The primary and general in November are  state elections so if you want to vote by mail, you need to request a mail ballot.  

You can do so online here.  But hurry (deadline is August 10) so you get the ballot on time.  If you don't get a mail in ballot, you can go to your regular polling place.  But check to be sure it hasn't moved.  

I've been to several candidate fundraisers this summer.  These are great ways to meet candidates, to ask them questions, and just get a feel for them.  You don't have to give them a check, but if you decide you like them, a donation is always welcome.  

 

One was for Ted Eischeid who came close to winning his NE Anchorage seat in 2022 - he was 72 votes short, in a district where Democrats won handily for US Rep, and State Senator.

Ted's a retired teacher, so education is a priority issue for him.  His opponent voted NOT to override the Governor's veto on education funds.  The override needed just one more vote!!

Another one for Calvin Schrage.  He's an incumbent, but it's probably a close race.  He's on the right in the blue shirt, with his campaign manager Erik Gunderson.  

And finally, just this week a fundraiser for three state Senate candidates - two from Fairbanks - Sen. Scott Kawasaki whose district was made much redder in the last redistricting.  I got to know Scott while I was blogging the legislature back in 2011.  A good man.  And Savannah Fletcher, an attorney, and she's Presiding Officer of the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly.

Matt, Scott, Savannah

The Anchorage candidate was Matt Claman.  Matt's wife was a colleague at the University, so I've known him for a long time.  He wanted the Fairbanks candidates to get some Anchorage exposure.  

Matt pointed out, when he spoke to the crowd at the fundraiser, that Alaska is the only state in the country that has multi-party (Democrats, Republicans, Independents) coalition majorities in the state House and Senate.  And that keeps us from going to either extreme.  

They'll be a lot more fundraising and campaigning between now and November.  I encourage people to go to fundraisers.  It's one of the easiest ways to meet the candidates in your districts. As I said, a donation is not required, but if you like the candidate, donate what you can.  Five dollars is good if that's the limit of your budget.  We don't currently have any limits on campaign contributions so you could give $10,000 too.  And some people are giving more than that.  

Talk to them, ask them hard questions, tell them your priorities (after you ask questions, not before).  

Thoughts On The Anchorage Mayor's Race

The only thing I know for certain, the current mayor needs to be retired.  He was the surprise winner last time in a runoff.  He was a candidate because of the pandemic and homelessness.  He was backed by those who opposed masks and the decisions to quarantine in Alaska and Anchorage.  A key group supporting him live in Geneva Woods, a neighborhood of large houses in mid-town, where his supporters were strongly opposed to the Municipality buying a Best Western Hotel that had seen better days and turning it into a shelter for the homeless.  Easy walking distance to their snooty neighborhood and that was unacceptable.  

His supporters have disrupted Assembly meetings, yelled epithets are LGBTQ and Jewish Assembly members, wore yellow stars and compared the restrictions due to COVID to be like the Holocaust (which they normally would deny even happened.)  

Many of his appointees have long gone.  One of his former City Managers is suing the city for about three quarters of a million dollars,  His approach to homeless folks was a mass shelter in a giant tent.  I'm still fairly certain that if we track down why he wanted to buy that tent, we'd find some sort of financial or political connection.  Snow removal has been a disaster.  

So, the mayor is not on my list.  

Suzanne LaFrance was on the Assembly for much of the Mayor's tenure, chair part of that time.  She early on announced she was running for Mayor.  This is a non-partisan race and I'm not sure if she is even registered as one part or another.  She's done a reasonably good job and certainly knows the details of what's gone on in Anchorage.  I even interviewed for six or seven years ago when she was a first time candidate running for the Assembly.  She was pretty raw, but dedicated.  She's learned a lot over the years.  

But then Chris Tuck announced he was running. Tuck is a Democrat who has been on the Anchorage School Board, but then spent more time in Juneau as a representative - including stints as minority and majority leader.  I met him when I blogged the legislature in 2010 and he's a very personable guy and has a reputation of being able to work out compromises across party lines.  He's got strong labor connections, yet LaFrance has garnered a lot of union support.  I was told he voted for legislation that labor opposed (or vice versa) but I have no details.  

Tuck's entry into the race threw the liberal challenge against the incumbent mayor into confusion.  Both were good candidates.  LaFrance supporters started pointing out that Tuck was anti-abortion.  He's never denied that, but he's also said he votes for what his constituents want, and to my knowledge, as a politician has gone along with the other Democrats on abortion issues.

Then Bill Popp joined the race.  Popp has been head of the Economic Development Council for many years and says he's never registered in either party.  Before Trump hijacked the Republican party, Popp's interest in business and economics would have aligned him with more traditional Republicans, at least with the Chamber of Commerce,  though I do not know his stance on social issues.  He has good knowledge of Anchorage.  

This race requires a candidate to get at least 45% to win.  The sense I get is that those who follow politics closely don't expect any of the candidates to reach that number.  

The question then is who will be in the runoff.  An article in the Anchorage Daily News today says the candidates suspect that Mayor Bronson will face one of the above three in a runoff.  

So, who to vote for?  I think LaFrance and Tuck would both make good mayors.  They're both level headed and decent people.  I suspect the same could be said for Popp, but I don't know him really, and my perception of him as part of the Chamber of Commerce crowd takes him out of my top two.  (Lots of people join the Chamber of Commerce, not because they are politically aligned with their fairly conservative business view of the world, but because that's where many of the key players gather weekly.  My uninformed sense is Popp probably fits in with the Chamber crowd comfortably.)

So, LaFrance or Tuck?  

I was happy when LaFrance announced her candidacy.  I was thrown into a conundrum when Tuck announced his interest in the race.  LaFrance seemed to be more intimately knowledgeable of City dealings because of her position on the Assembly and dealing with all the issues for the last six years from there.  

Tuck seemed like an interloper, though he represents Anchorage and is an astute politician who has paid close attention to the city in which his district lies.  I'd note that when Elvi Gray Jackson announced her US Senate run in 2022, Tuck announced he would run for her Alaska State Senate seat.  That avoided a run against fellow Anchorage legislator Andy Josephson.  Both had been redistricted into the same district.  But when Gray-Jackson saw what was developing in the US Senate race, she pulled out and signed back on to run for her State Senate seat.  At this point, Tuck pulled out altogether - choosing not to run against either fellow Democrat.  I think that reflects positively on his moral compass and willingness to support his fellow Democratic legislators.  

It also suggests to me that he didn't make the decision to run against LaFrance for mayor lightly.  

As I watched the lists of people signing up to support LaFrance or Tuck, it appeared to me that people who knew LaFrance the Assembly member, supported her.  Those who knew Tuck from his rule in the State legislature supported him.  

I think they'd both do a good job.  My biggest concern is that they'll cancel each other out and Popp ends up in a runoff with Bronson.  And, again, I think Popp will be a competent mayor, but not necessarily someone aligned with a forward looking stance.  (By that I mean, someone who recognizes that Climate Change is the biggest challenge facing humanity and business has been a prime supporter of policies that have brought us to this climate crisis.)

I've picked one of the two.  My absentee ballot is still in the house.  I've got some time yet before I have to turn it in.  I'm on pause just in case something happens to sway me toward the other candidate.  I'm not expecting anything to change, but just in case.  

The only conclusion I have come to firmly is that Anchorage should switch to Ranked Choice Voting.  Then folks can vote for the first and second (etc.) choices.   

How Wisely Did The No Constitutional Convention Campaign Spend Its Money?

The Alaska Constitution requires a ballot measure on the ballot every ten years, asking voters whether there should be a new constitutional convention.  This year Alaska held the sixth such election.  

Those pushing for an election had two main goals:

1.  To make abortion illegal by either cutting out the Constitution's privacy language, adding new language that would outright ban abortions and/or say the privacy section doesn't cover abortions.

2.  Make the process for choosing judges more political so they could get judges who will not interpret the privacy clause to allow abortions.

There were any number of additional far right goals that they would love to tamper with if they got the chance.  

The measure lost decisively on Tuesday.  Mail-in, absentee, and questioned ballots are likely to make the No vote even higher and there's no way they could change the outcome.  

 

An Anchorage Daily News article today tells us:

"Defend Our Constitution dominated spending 80 to 1.

They recently reported spending $4 million and raising $4.7 million. The donations came mostly from Outside organizations like the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which is based in Washington, D.C. and has been described as a left-wing dark money group.*

Convention YES spent about $50,000, usually from small contributions from individual Alaskans, allowing them to make small ad purchases."

So, how effectively did both sides spend their money?  It's hard to know.  But since we've been voting on this question every ten years now since 1972, we can at least look at the margin of victory for the NO vote over the decades:

Alaska Constitutional Convention Question (1972)
Result		Votes	Percentage
No		55,389	65.49%
Yes		29,192	34.51%

From Ballotpedia

Alaska Measure 1 (1982)
Result		Votes	Percentage
No		108,319	62.93%
Yes		63,816	37.07%

From Ballotpedia

Alaska Constitutional Convention Question (1992)
Result		Votes	Percentage
No		142,735	62.70%
Yes		84,929	37.30%

From Ballotpedia

2002 was 72% No;  28% Yes.  [This image from Alaska Division of Elections because I couldn't find the 2002 election from Ballotpedia.]

Alaska Ballot Measure 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
No		179567	66.59%
Yes		90079	33.41%

From Ballotpedia 2012

Alaska Ballot Measure 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		62,985	30.15%
No		145,937	69.85%

From Ballotpedia   2022   [These numbers will change when all the mail-in and absentee ballots are added in.]

So, the highest NO vote has been 72% NO in 2002.  The lowest No vote was 62.7% in 1972.  

I'm guessing they could have spent $2 million and still defeated the measure soundly.  Probably $1 million.  The extra $2-3 million could have done the state a lot more good spent on the governor's race and a few of the state legislative races.  

I suspect a lot of money was wasted in this campaign.  Sometimes you don't know, but in this case we have ten years of election results suggesting Alaskans aren't interested in a Constitutional Convention.  

*I'd note that "has been described as a left-wing dark money group" is just troublesome language.  Use of the passive voice allows you to say something happened without saying who did it.  "Has been described as" could be pinned onto nearly any phrase.  And 'dark money group' is a short hand cliche that means 'bad'.  I'd bet half the readers would have trouble giving an accurate definition and they certainly wouldn't all define it to mean the same thing or in a way that would accurately describe the Sixteen Thirty Fund.  

However The Night Ends, Remember These Two Things

 1.  However things turn out, remember that more people will have voted for Democratic candidates than Republican.  Only a Senate that gives small states (Wyoming and Alaska both have under 1,000,000 populations) the same number of Senators as large states (California has almost 40 million and New York has 20 million) and gerrymandered House maps cause the outcome to seem close. 

2.  Whatever the results, we must continue the struggle for respect, decency, understanding, and democracy.  No gloating if the results are good, no giving up if they aren't.  

The 2024 election begins Monday.  Lots of people have to talk to people about their values and where they came from and listen to others do the same.  Here's one path forward:

What is going to happen in these midterms? And what will it take for the pro-freedom movement to defeat American fascism?

Join @anatosaurus and me for this @nytopinion Twitter Space today at 12:30 pm ET.https://t.co/W9xLbOYjK4

— THE PERSUADERS by Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) November 7, 2022

I worked at a polling place today from 10:30 to 2:30.  Everyone was cordial to everyone.  Even when a ballot got jammed in the machine and people had to wait, they were calm and reasonable.  (I did have home made chocolate chip cookies as compensation for the wait to fix the machine.)

Click to enlarge

Alaska has great I VOTED stickers.  The blue Alaska flag stickers and then some alternate stickers designed by kids.