Legislature(2013 - 2014)
2014-03-12 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1856 HJR 22 The following, which was advanced to third reading from the March 10, 2014, calendar (page 1820), was read the third time: HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 22 Requesting the United States Congress to call a convention of the states to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials; and urging the legislatures of the other 49 states to request the United States Congress to call a convention of the states. Representative Kawasaki moved and asked unanimous consent that HJR 22 be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 1. There being no objection, it was so ordered. The Speaker stated that, without objection, HJR 22 would be returned to second reading for all amendments. Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representatives Kawasaki, Tuck, Josephson, and Kreiss-Tomkins: Page 1, lines 2 - 4 (title amendment): Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Page 2, line 4, following "power;": Insert "and WHEREAS the right of the people to keep and bear arms is protected under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1857 WHEREAS the Constitution of the State of Alaska also protects the right of a citizen, as an individual right, to keep and bear arms; and WHEREAS federal protection of a person's right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States should be strengthened and expanded, as exemplified by art. I, sec. 19, of the Constitution of the State of Alaska;" Page 2, line 7: Delete "sole" Page 2, lines 8 - 9: Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Representative Kawasaki moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. Representative Stoltze objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 8 NAYS: 30 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Kreiss-Tomkins, Tarr, Tuck Nays: Austerman, Chenault, Costello, Edgmon, Feige, Foster, Gara, Gattis, Herron, Higgins, Holmes, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, LeDoux, Lynn, Millett, Munoz, Nageak, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Saddler, Seaton, Stoltze, Thompson, P.Wilson, T.Wilson Excused: Drummond, Hawker And so, Amendment No. 1 was not adopted. Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representatives Josephson, Tarr, Tuck, Kawasaki, Kreiss-Tomkins, Kito III, Gara, and Guttenberg: 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1858 Page 1, lines 2 - 4 (title amendment): Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Page 2, line 4, following "power;": Insert "and WHEREAS the Constitution of the United States does not explicitly guarantee that the rights it protects are held equally by all citizens without regard to sexual orientation; and WHEREAS the Employment Non-Discrimination Act recognizes the occurrence of discrimination and aims to eliminate discrimination based on sexual orientation; and WHEREAS the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013 passed the United States Senate in 2013 with bipartisan support, including the support of both Alaska senators, and is now awaiting action in the United States House of Representatives;" Page 2, line 7: Delete "sole" Page 2, lines 8 - 9: Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Representative Josephson moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Nageak objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 29 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1859 Yeas: Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Kreiss-Tomkins, Tarr, Tuck Nays: Austerman, Chenault, Costello, Edgmon, Feige, Foster, Gattis, Herron, Higgins, Holmes, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, LeDoux, Lynn, Millett, Munoz, Nageak, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Saddler, Seaton, Stoltze, Thompson, P.Wilson, T.Wilson Excused: Drummond, Hawker And so, Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representatives Kreiss-Tomkins, Tuck, Tarr, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Gara, and Guttenberg: Page 1, lines 2 - 4 (title amendment): Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Page 1, line 10, following "government": Insert "and special interests" Page 2, line 4, following "power;": Insert "and WHEREAS a vast majority of Americans recognize that the influence of large contributions by corporations, wealthy individuals, and organizations harms the ability of average citizens to have a voice in their own government; and WHEREAS the narrow majority five to four decision of the United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), allows corporations and unions to make unlimited independent expenditures supporting or opposing a candidate for public office; and WHEREAS unlimited independent expenditures from corporations and unions were prohibited until the ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission; and WHEREAS much of the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent by corporations and unions since the ruling of the United States 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1860 Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is used for negative ads, which often misinform voters rather than lead to a productive discussion of the states' and nation's most important issues; and WHEREAS, unless the United States Supreme Court reverses its ruling, the only way to reverse the harmful effects of the Citizens United ruling is to amend the Constitution of the United States; and WHEREAS, while not addressed by the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, unlimited independent expenditures made by individuals also distort the political process and ability of all American citizens to have an equal voice in government;" Page 2, line 7: Delete "sole" Page 2, lines 8 - 9: Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Representative Kreiss-Tomkins moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Representative Keller objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 Second Reading Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 29 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Kreiss-Tomkins, Tarr, Tuck Nays: Austerman, Chenault, Costello, Edgmon, Feige, Foster, Gattis, Herron, Higgins, Holmes, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, LeDoux, Lynn, Millett, Munoz, Nageak, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Saddler, Seaton, Stoltze, Thompson, P.Wilson, T.Wilson 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1861 Excused: Drummond, Hawker And so, Amendment No. 3 was not adopted. Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representatives Tarr, Tuck, Guttenberg, Josephson, Gara, Kreiss-Tomkins, Kito III, and Kawasaki: Page 1, lines 2 - 4 (title amendment): Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Page 2, line 4, following "power;": Insert "and WHEREAS the Constitution of the United States does not explicitly guarantee that the rights it protects are held equally by all citizens without regard to sex; and WHEREAS, without the Equal Rights Amendment, women regularly have to fight long, expensive, and difficult legal battles in an effort to prove that their rights are equal to those of men; and WHEREAS the Equal Rights Amendment would provide a clear judicial standard for deciding cases of sex discrimination, since federal and state courts still reflect confusion and inconsistency in dealing with sex discrimination claims;" Page 2, line 7: Delete "sole" Page 2, lines 8 - 9: Delete "that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Representative Tarr moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Representative T. Wilson objected. 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1862 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 4 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 Second Reading Amendment No. 4 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 29 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Kreiss-Tomkins, Tarr, Tuck Nays: Austerman, Chenault, Costello, Edgmon, Feige, Foster, Gattis, Herron, Higgins, Holmes, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, LeDoux, Lynn, Millett, Munoz, Nageak, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Saddler, Seaton, Stoltze, Thompson, P.Wilson, T.Wilson Excused: Drummond, Hawker And so, Amendment No. 4 was not adopted. Amendment No. 5 was offered by Representatives Herron and Edgmon: Page 1, lines 3 - 4 (title amendment): Delete ", and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Page 2, line 9: Delete ", and limit the terms of office of federal government officials" Representative Herron moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 5 be adopted. Representative Isaacson objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 5 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 Second Reading Amendment No. 5 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 3 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1863 Yeas: Edgmon, Feige, Foster, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Herron, Josephson, Kito III, Lynn, Munoz, Nageak, Saddler, Tarr, Tuck Nays: Austerman, Chenault, Costello, Gattis, Higgins, Holmes, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, LeDoux, Millett, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Seaton, Stoltze, Thompson, P.Wilson, T.Wilson Excused: Drummond, Hawker Absent: Gara, Kawasaki, Kreiss-Tomkins And so, Amendment No. 5 was not adopted. Amendment No. 6 was offered by Representative T. Wilson: Page 2, line 1: Insert "WHEREAS the federal government has ceased to live under a proper interpretation of the Constitution of the United States; and" Representative T. Wilson moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 6 be adopted. Representative Josephson objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 6 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 Second Reading Amendment No. 6 YEAS: 24 NAYS: 14 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Chenault, Costello, Edgmon, Feige, Foster, Gattis, Herron, Higgins, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, Lynn, Millett, Munoz, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Seaton, Stoltze, Thompson, T.Wilson Nays: Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Holmes, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Kreiss-Tomkins, LeDoux, Nageak, Saddler, Tarr, Tuck, P.Wilson 2014-03-12 House Journal Page 1864 Excused: Drummond, Hawker And so, Amendment No. 6 was adopted. HJR 22 am was automatically in third reading. The question being: "Shall HJR 22 am pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: HJR 22 am Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 24 NAYS: 13 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Chenault, Costello, Feige, Gattis, Herron, Higgins, Holmes, Hughes, Isaacson, Johnson, Keller, LeDoux, Lynn, Millett, Munoz, Neuman, Olson, Pruitt, Reinbold, Saddler, Stoltze, Thompson, P.Wilson, T.Wilson Nays: Austerman, Edgmon, Foster, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Josephson, Kawasaki, Kito III, Kreiss-Tomkins, Nageak, Seaton, Tuck Excused: Drummond, Hawker Absent: Tarr And so, HJR 22 am passed the House and was referred to the Chief Clerk for engrossment.