Alaska provides assistance to any voter who desires help in reading or marking the ballot. AS 15.15.240 states: "Assisting voter by judge. A qualified voter who cannot read, mark the ballot, or sign his name may request a judge, a person, or not more than two persons of his choice to assist him. If the judge is requested, he shall assist the voter. If any other person is requested, the person shall state upon oath before the election judge that he will not divulge the vote cast by the person whom he assists." Many voters do ask for and receive assistance as provided in this section of the Alaska Statutes. In Alaska, there are many different Eskimo and Indian dialects. English is the only language spoken and understood by all minority groups. The State of Alaska had to file suits in 1966 and in 1971 in the U.S. District Courts in Washington, D.C. to be excluded from the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended. In both instances, the determination was made that no "test or device" was used as a prerequisite for voting. Therefore, the State of Alaska should not be required to go through this procedure again. If I may be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to call on me. Sincerely, LOWELL THOMAS, Jr., 2 Constitutional amendment No. 2-English eliminated as requisite for voting. 1 Constitutional amendment No. 1-Establishing voting age at 18 years. 3 Constitutional amendment No. 3-Secretary of State designated Lieutenant Governor. Constitutional amendment No. 4-Chief justice election by supreme court. › Constitutional amendment No. 5-Term of office judicial system administrator. STATE OF ALASKA ELECTION DISTRICT 2 SAMPLE PRIMARY ELECTION BALLOT AUGUST 25, 1970 • Mark only by use of cross marks, "X" marks, checks, or plus signs. Place marks at the left of the names of the candidates for whom you desire to vote. Mark must be inside or touching the square so as to indicate the intent of the vater Erasures and corrections will invalidate only that part of the ballot in which they appear. If you spoil or mar your ballot, you may return it to the election judge and receive another ballot. Your spoiled ballot will be destroyed in your presence. Ballots As Proposed By House Joint Resolution No. 7 Ballot 1 Title: ESTABLISHING VOTING AGE AT EIGHTEEN YEARS Proposition: This provision amends Article V of the State Constitution which provides for a voting age of nineteen years. The amendment would permit persons eighteen years of age, or older, to vote in any state or local election. FOR Ballot 2 As Proposed By House Joint Resolution No. 51 am S Proposition: This provision amends Article V of the State FOR Ballot 3 As Proposed By Senate Joint Resolution No. 2 Title: SECRETARY OF STATE DESIGNATED LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Proposition: The proposition would amend the State Constitution in order to change the name of the secretary of state to lleutenant governor. All powers and duties of the office remain the same as under present constitutional language. FOR Ballot 4 As Proposed By Free Conference Committee Substitute For Senate Title: CHIEF JUSTICE ELECTION BY Proposition: This provision amends the State Constitution by FOR Ballot 5 Title: TERM OF OFFICE JUDICIAL Proposition: This provision amends the State Constitution by FOR TESTIMONY OF HON. J. STANLEY POTTINGER, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES P. TURNER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL; GERALD JONES, CHIEF, VOTING SECTION; BRIAN LANDSBERG, CHIEF, APPELLATE SECTION; CYNTHIA ATTWOOD, ATTORNEY; ANNE CLARKE, DIRECTOR, RESEARCH UNIT Mr. POTTINGER. Certainly, Senator, we have the desire to respond to your questions, so therefore, I have summarized the statement that is provided for the committee. We request, of course, if we may, that the statement as a whole be made part of the record. But I will be pleased to summarize an edited version for you, which is less than half the length of the other statement. Senator TUNNEY. Good. Your statement will be incorporated at the conclusion of your testimony as if read. Please proceed. Mr. POTTINGER. Thank you, Senator. I am pleased to appear before the subcommittee this morning to testify on the extension of those provisions of the Voting Rights Act which are due to expire later this year. Accompanying me here this morning are Deputy Assistant Attorney General James P. Turner, on my immediate left, and Gerald Jones, who will be here in a moment, the chief of our voting section. They both are responsible for administering the Voting Rights Act for the United States. On my immediate right is Brian Landsberg, chief of our appellate section; Cynthia Attwood, an attorney in that section-excuse me, Cynthia on my far left, and on my far right, Anne Clarke, who is director of our research unit. They have assisted in the appellate section in the study of the issues surrounding the proposed extension, and are here and available to provide you with information and to testify or to be of any assistance that is appropriate. In my testimony I describe the facts and reasonings which support President Ford's recommended bill, S. 407, which as you know was introduced by Senators Griffin, Mathias, and Scott, and I will also discuss briefly S. 1279, which Senators Hart and Scott have introduced, and H.R. 6219, the bill under consideration today by the House Judiciary Committee. In addition, amendments to S. 1279 have been introduced, proposing additional changes that should be made in the act, primarily to protect further the rights of persons of Spanish heritage and citizens whose primary language is other than English. In my view, as explained in our legal memorandum which is attached as exhibit 32, the Voting Rights Act, in its various protections against discrimination on account of race or color, does to some extent already cover Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans and Native Americans. The possible need for further protection, however, deserves careful consideration by the subcommittee, and I am pleased to see that representatives of these groups and other persons concerned with this question are testifying in these hearings. My testimony will outline the considerations of which we are presently aware on this issue, and which we believe are relevant to these proposals. As you know, the Voting Rights Act is unusual legislation in several respects. First, it attacks a problem which, prior to 1965, had been allowed to sap the strength of our democratic form of governmentthe denial and abridgment of the right to vote, based on race. The second unusual aspect of the act is because of this prior history, Congress enacted what the Supreme Court has called "a complex scheme of stringent remedies aimed at areas where voting discrimination has been most flagrant." Section 5 represents a substantial departure, in this regard, from ordinary concepts of our federal system. And, finally, the act has been unusually effective. It has brought about a prompt, visible, dramatic increase in political participation by the black citizens in the South whose prior exclusion from the political process it was primarily designed to remedy. The questions before us this morning are whether, in light of present needs, in light of the successes of the Voting Rights Act to date, and in light of the principles of federalism, the act should be extended. If answered affirmatively, a secondary concern is for how long it should be extended. To properly consider these questions we should examine the workings of the act itself. Has it proved workable? Has it promoted nondiscrimination in voting? Does experience under it warrant extending its special coverage provisions to protect more fully the rights of other groups? Has it been so successful that it is no longer needed? How much of a strain on federalism has resulted? I believe that the results of such an examination, together with an examination of the judicial and legislative precedents, strongly support the administration's proposed 5-year extension, S. 407. Section 4 determines which States shall be subject to the special provisions of the act-this is of the 1965 act, as amended in 1970relating to the suspension of tests or devices, preclearance of changes in voting laws, listing of voters by Federal examiners, and the use of Federal observers to monitor the conduct of elections. These are the so-called "special" provisions. Section 4(b), as amended in 1970, provides for coverage of States and political subdivisions which the Attorney General determines maintained as a prerequisite to voting any test or device on November 1, 1964 or November 1, 1968, and which the Director of the Census certifies had less than 50 percent voter participation or registration in the Presidential election of 1964 or 1968, respectively. Exhibit 1 lists the States and the subdivisions covered under section 4 of the act in 1965 and again in 1970. While most of the covered jurisdictions are located in the South, some are located in the North and West, particularly in areas with large Native American or Spanish-speaking populations, such as Arizona and New York. The provision of section 4 which leads to today's hearing states that jurisdictions covered by virtue of the certification of the Attorney General and Director of the Census may escape coverage if, under the |