Party or Privacy - New Federal Guidelines Want Details

Let's start off with some fun facts. First, the Alaska State Constitution (my favorite!), Article One, Section 22: “The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed.” The right to privacy was enshrouded in our state's guiding document in 1972, ratified by over 82 percent of the vote. And it's kind of important to us.

Our elected officials invoke it all the time. Earlier this year, the legislature did their best to avoid a proposal to comply with the Bush (43) Administration's REAL ID Act, a security mandate requiring private information to be handed over to the federal government in trade for access to that place beyond the TSA checkpoint.

“Many people believe that the idea that the data’s not going anywhere, that’s hard for some folks to accept that that doesn’t happen given,” Sen. Mike Dunleavy (R-Wasilla) said. “[J]ust about every week in the newspaper, there’s a report that there’s been data breaches, security breaches in data banks that were never even supposed to be shared.” It was a rare moment in which he raised valid concerns. But, vacations are also really important, so they eventually complied. Rep. Steve Thompson (R-Fairbanks) buried language bringing Alaska into compliance with REAL ID in a bill largely about training for first responders and the (privacy) rights of drivers being stopped by law enforcement. It passed the House unanimously and the Senate with three-quarters of the body in support.

But they dragged their knuckles throughout the process and, to provide cover, also passed a nonbinding resolution objecting to the thing they just passed. Because privacy is a very big concern and they have to knock on the concerned's doors to secure reelection.

We're a state that, in 2013, considered nullification to prevent any hypothetical future gun control laws implemented by President Obama. Eventually, they settled on a compromise: a law was passed prohibiting state law enforcement from aiding the enforcement of any future gun control measures. Because the State's constitutional privacy clause matters. Whether you're a conservative worrying about the feds infringing on Second Amendment rights or a liberal adamantly opposed to restrictions on abortion, privacy is a huge deal in Alaska.

Republican lawmakers, especially, hoot, holler, and stamp their campaign literature any time they can possibly – even tangentially – claim to have fought for the right to privacy.

And then this one guy got elected leader of the free world.

“In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” He said. “I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD.”

President Donald Trump then appointed a commission to investigate voter fraud and suppression. He put Kansas Secretary of State and Harvard, Oxford, and Yale-educated attorney (drain that swamp!) Kris Kobach in charge. Kobach is well known for his role in implementing rigid ID laws that require a birth certificate or passport in order to vote to cut down on voter fraud.

In effect, the requirements really just appear aimed at cutting down voting in general – at least, for certain people. White America, fear not. Everyone else, fear a lot. Federal courts in North Carolina and Texas have ruled that restrictions Kobach has successfully championed into law primarily disadvantage lower income and minority voters. One notable ruling from a federal court in Virginia found that they “target African Americans with almost surgical precision.”

But, as goes Kansas, so goes the nation. Said nobody. Ever.

Kobach's commission took a bad idea in Kansas and decided to take it national – and not state by state, but centralized and regulated by the federal government. The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity has formally requested all 50 states and the District of Columbia to turn over a lot of private data. Names, party affiliation, addresses, dates of birth, the last four of your social security number, voting history, criminal records, and whether or not someone is registered to vote in more than one state. Never mind that Kobach's strategy yielded just nine alleged accounts of voter fraud out of 1.8 million Kansas voters.

Fun fact number two: Under the The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, states determine the bulk of election procedure. That provision accords the oxygen that keeps Alaska's Privacy Clause alive. It fundamentally recognizes the state's right to regulate what private election and voting information should be surrendered to the feds. But that information – sovereign information – is now under request of forfeiture by the federal government, despite there being no power designated under the constitution to do so.

I looked outside today. I failed to see David Eastman, Mike Dunleavy, Pete Kelly, or any other of the “state's rights,” “protect privacy” conservatives piping up about it. No pitchforks. Mike Chenault, who just a few years ago seemed poised to relitigate the Civil War over hypothetical gun control measures President Obama never attempted, offers the sound of crickets one-hand-clapping. Hell, there hasn't even been a single press release. Absolute bupkis. Maybe they're super busy not doing much about our fiscal crisis?

Governor Bill Walker doled out a statement last week clarifying what information state law allowed and prohibited. Voting, social security, driver's license, phone, and state ID numbers are not permissible to relay, alongside birth dates, place of birth, primary ballot records, and signatures. But voting status, names, mailing addresses, voter registration dates, party affiliation, district and precinct designation, voting history, and personal residence address (unless requested under Alaska Statute 15.07.195 – because we all do that, right?) are fair game.

That seems dumb. But, one side of the partisan divide is staying entirely mum on the issue (which also seems dumb).

Twenty-seven states have have answered Kobach and Trump's request with a solid “Um, no,” to which Trump tweeted, "Numerous states are refusing to give information to the very distinguished VOTER FRAUD PANEL. What are they trying to hide?" I'm going to try to say this in a way he might understand: PRIVATE INFORMATION YOU HAVE NO TITLE TO FFS ARE YOU SERIOUS SAD. Even Kris Kobach conceded that Kansas won't give up social security information at the request of Kris-freaking-Kobach.

Fun fact number three: In Alaska, the only ones raising their hands are the Democrats. The Senate minority fired off a letter to Lt. Gov. Byron Mallott last week lambasting what they called (and what is) an “egregious attempt at federal overreach.”

“Our Constitution is extremely clear, and extremely strong on privacy rights,” East Anchorage Democratic Senator Bill Wielechowski said in a press release. “I’m hoping that this request to the administration is a no-brainer.”

His colleague, Sen. Tom Begich, representing downtown, dovetailed. “There is no wondering in this case, there is no debate. We have a decisive constitutional mandate that [tells] us what we are bound to do.”

The executive branch offers a lot of expansive powers. This is not, and should never be, one of them. This is the abyss not only staring back, but demanding your social security number. As that famous liberal bastion, the Heritage Foundation, once wrote, “[T]he power ends when it reaches too far into the retained dominion of state autonomy.” In his ruling in the 1941 Supreme Court case, United States v Darby, Chief Justice Harlan Stone opined that the Tenth Amendment is "but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered."

So, how much are you willing to surrender? And which elected officials have your back? Pick a side. Party or Privacy. It's a pretty important choice.