There is good news for Alaskans who want elections that are both secure and trustworthy.  Governor Mike Dunleavy (R – Alaska) just introduced a follow-up bill that is largely identical to Senate Bill 64 (which he recently vetoed and the Legislature failed to override), with two additions: signature verification and a delayed effective date. Those additions provide a practical path forward and another opportunity to pass meaningful election reform before the Legislature adjourns in just two weeks.

But Alaskans also deserve honesty about the political reality surrounding this bill.

SB 64 was not rushed legislation. It was the product of nearly a decade of work on election integrity issues and represented the first major modernization of Alaska’s election administration laws in more than ten years. I worked directly with Senator Bill Wielechowski (D – Anchorage) to help craft legislation that balanced security, transparency, and voter access. The goal was simple: strengthen confidence in Alaska’s elections while protecting the rights of lawful voters. In essence; make it easy to vote and hard to cheat.

The bill included practical and widely supported reforms that solved real problems.

It strengthened voter roll maintenance to improve the state’s ability to update outdated records and remove ineligible registrations. It enhanced election cybersecurity after the 2020 data breach affecting approximately 113,000 Alaskans. It expanded transparency through daily unofficial vote reporting and clearer communication about ballot counting.

Most importantly, SB 64 created ballot tracking and established a secure ballot-curing process. Voters would be able to track their absentee ballot from the moment it was mailed until it was counted. The bill also created a clear and limited process to cure minor envelope errors after verifying voter identity. The ballot itself could never be altered.

That reform addressed a major gap in Alaska law. Today, Alaska has no formal statute or regulation guaranteeing ballot curing or even requiring voters to be notified if their ballot is rejected. In practice, curing often occurs inconsistently and may depend on whether a political party representative or campaign advocate is present during absentee ballot review board proceedings to request review of a ballot.

That is not a system Alaskans should accept. Whether a lawful ballot is counted should not depend on who happens to be in the room.

SB 64 also addressed challenges facing rural Alaska by improving coordination with communities to help keep polling places staffed, expanding early absentee voting opportunities, and codifying tribal identification as a valid form of voter ID.

Despite broad bipartisan support and years of work, Governor Dunleavy vetoed the bill. The concerns raised were not that SB 64 was bad policy. In fact, the Governor is now advancing substantially the same legislation himself.

Instead, the objections largely centered on two issues raised after the bill had already moved through the legislative process: signature verification and the bill’s effective date.

Now the Governor’s proposal adds signature verification, which provides an important additional layer of security for absentee voting, and delays implementation to address administrative concerns. Those are reasonable additions. This is how policy should evolve: by improving legislation, not abandoning it.

At the same time, it is important to recognize that the Governor’s proposal still contains flaws that must be corrected before final passage.

The ballot-curing language remains insufficient to address the majority of rejected ballots, likely due to drafting issues rather than policy intent. More importantly, the bill omits one of the most important security provisions included in SB 64: contingency language tying ballot curing to ballot tracking.

That omission matters.

Signature verification is an added safeguard, but it does not replace the need for ballot tracking and voter notification requirements. These measures serve different purposes and are designed to work together. Ballot tracking strengthens chain of custody, protects voter privacy, and ensures voters receive timely notification regarding the status of their ballot. Without tying ballot curing to ballot tracking, the security and transparency protections surrounding absentee ballots remain incomplete.

With less than two weeks left in the legislative session, Alaskans are right to question why a bill that took nearly ten years to develop was vetoed, only for nearly identical legislation to be introduced immediately afterward. It would be unfortunate if this process was more about providing political cover for the Governor and certain legislators than about delivering real election reform.

This also is not the first time the Governor has vetoed legislation and then shortly afterward introduced substantially similar proposals himself.

Alaskans are tired of political games. They expect elected officials to work together, resolve differences during the legislative process, and deliver results; especially on issues as important as election integrity and public trust.

The path forward is clear but time-limited. We already have legislation that has been vetted, debated, and improved over years of public process. The Legislature should use the remaining days of session to finish the job, correct the remaining issues regardless of political personalities, and finally deliver the election reforms Alaskans expect and deserve.

I remain committed to doing that work.

Representative Sarah Vance (R – Homer) has served in the House since 2019.