Legislature(2021 - 2022)
2022-03-09 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2022-03-09 House Journal Page 2048 HB 62 The following was before the House in second reading with Amendment No. 4 moved and pending: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 62(JUD) "An Act relating to the Legislative Ethics Act; and relating to solemnization of marriage." Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Eastman: Page 1, lines 3-4 of the amendment: Delete all material and insert: "(D) a legislator from accepting travel and hospitality and reimbursement for reasonable personal expenses incurred primarily for the purpose of solemnizing a marriage in their capacity as a legislator if all such gifts are disclosed to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics." Representative Eastman moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Objection was heard and withdrawn. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 4 was adopted. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 4 as amended be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: 2022-03-09 House Journal Page 2049 CSHB 62(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 4 as amended YEAS: 15 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 4 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Cronk, Eastman, Gillham, Kaufman, Kurka, LeBon, McCabe, McCarty, McKay, Rasmussen, Rauscher, Shaw, Tarr, Tilton, Vance Nays: Claman, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Hannan, Hopkins, Johnson, Josephson, Kreiss-Tomkins, Merrick, Nelson, Ortiz, Patkotak, Schrage, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Wool, Zulkosky Excused: Carpenter, Prax, Thompson, Tuck And so, Amendment No. 4 as amended was not adopted. The Speaker stated that all further amendments to CSHB 62(JUD) am must be submitted within fifteen minutes. Amendment No. 5 was offered by Representative Eastman: Page 4, following line 17: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 2. AS 25.05.261(c) is amended to read: (c) Nothing in this section creates or implies a duty or obligation on a person authorized to solemnize a marriage under (a) [(a)(1), (3), OR (4)] of this section to solemnize any marriage." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Representative Eastman moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 5 be adopted. Representative Josephson objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 5 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 62(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 5 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 4 ABSENT: 0 2022-03-09 House Journal Page 2050 Yeas: Cronk, Eastman, Gillham, Johnson, Kaufman, Kurka, LeBon, McCabe, McKay, Nelson, Rauscher, Shaw, Tilton, Vance Nays: Claman, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Hannan, Hopkins, Josephson, Kreiss-Tomkins, McCarty, Merrick, Ortiz, Patkotak, Rasmussen, Schrage, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Tarr, Wool, Zulkosky Excused: Carpenter, Prax, Thompson, Tuck And so, Amendment No. 5 was not adopted. Amendment No. 6 was offered by Representative Eastman: Page 4, following line 17: Insert new bill sections to read: "* Sec. 2. AS 25.05.261(a) is amended to read: (a) Marriages may be solemnized by any person in the state [(1) BY A MINISTER, PRIEST, OR RABBI OF ANY CHURCH OR CONGREGATION IN THE STATE, OR BY A COMMISSIONED OFFICER OF THE SALVATION ARMY, OR BY THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OR ELDER OF RECOGNIZED CHURCHES OR CONGREGATIONS THAT TRADITIONALLY DO NOT HAVE REGULAR MINISTERS, PRIESTS, OR RABBIS, ANYWHERE WITHIN THE STATE; (2) BY A MARRIAGE COMMISSIONER OR JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE STATE ANYWHERE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE COMMISSIONER OR OFFICER; (3) BEFORE OR IN ANY RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION OR CONGREGATION ACCORDING TO THE ESTABLISHED RITUAL OR FORM COMMONLY PRACTICED IN THE ORGANIZATION OR CONGREGATION; OR (4) BY AN INDIVIDUAL HOLDING AN ELECTIVE PUBLIC OFFICE IN THE STATE]. * Sec. 3. AS 25.05.261(c) is amended to read: (c) Nothing in this section creates or implies a duty or obligation on a person authorized to solemnize a marriage under (a) [(a)(1), (3), OR (4)] of this section to solemnize any marriage." 2022-03-09 House Journal Page 2051 Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 5, line 23: Delete "AS 25.05.041(a)(3) and 25.05.041(a)(5)" Insert "AS 22.15.100(3); AS 25.05.041(a)(3), 25.05.041(a)(5), 25.05.081, 25.05.281, and 25.05.371 are repealed." Representative Eastman moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 6 be adopted. Representative Claman objected. Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 6 was offered by Representative Eastman: Page 1, line 4 of the amendment following "person": Insert "18 years of age or older" Representative Eastman moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 6 be adopted. Representative Wool objected and withdrew the objection. There being no further objection Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 6 was adopted. Representative Eastman rose to a point of order regarding the violation of section 121 of Mason's Manual. The Speaker, citing precedence, ruled the point out of order. Representative Eastman appealed the ruling of the chair. The question being: "Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?" The roll was taken with the following result: Sustain Ruling of the Chair YEAS: 21 NAYS: 14 EXCUSED: 4 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Claman, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Hannan, Hopkins, Josephson, Kreiss-Tomkins, Merrick, Ortiz, Patkotak, Rasmussen, Schrage, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Tarr, Wool, Zulkosky 2022-03-09 House Journal Page 2052 Nays: Cronk, Eastman, Gillham, Johnson, Kaufman, Kurka, LeBon, McCabe, McCarty, McKay, Nelson, Rauscher, Shaw, Tilton Excused: Carpenter, Prax, Thompson, Tuck Absent: Vance And so, the ruling of the chair was sustained. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 6 as amended be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 62(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 6 as amended YEAS: 17 NAYS: 19 EXCUSED: 4 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Cronk, Eastman, Gillham, Johnson, Kaufman, Kurka, LeBon, McCabe, McCarty, McKay, Merrick, Nelson, Rasmussen, Rauscher, Shaw, Tilton, Vance Nays: Claman, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Hannan, Hopkins, Josephson, Kreiss-Tomkins, Ortiz, Patkotak, Schrage, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Tarr, Wool, Zulkosky Excused: Carpenter, Prax, Thompson, Tuck And so, Amendment No. 6 as amended was not adopted. Amendment Nos. 7 and 8 were not offered. Amendment No. 9 was offered by Representatives Rasmussen, Drummond, Snyder, Spohnholz, and Vance: Page 1, line 1: (title amendment) Delete "and" Page 1, line 2, following "marriage": Insert "; and relating to consent to marriage" Page 5, line 23: Delete "and 25.05.041(a)(5)" Insert ", 25.05.041(a)(5), and 25.05.171(b)" 2022-03-09 House Journal Page 2053 Representative Rasmussen moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 9 be adopted. Representative Eastman objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 9 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 62(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 9 YEAS: 33 NAYS: 3 EXCUSED: 4 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Claman, Cronk, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Gillham, Hannan, Hopkins, Josephson, Kaufman, Kreiss-Tomkins, LeBon, McCabe, McCarty, McKay, Merrick, Nelson, Ortiz, Patkotak, Rasmussen, Rauscher, Schrage, Shaw, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Tarr, Tilton, Vance, Wool, Zulkosky Nays: Eastman, Johnson, Kurka Excused: Carpenter, Prax, Thompson, Tuck And so, Amendment No. 9 was adopted and the new title follows: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 62(JUD) am "An Act relating to the Legislative Ethics Act; relating to solemnization of marriage; and relating to consent to marriage." Representative Claman moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB 62(JUD) am be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading, and placed on final passage. There was objection. CSHB 62(JUD) am will advance to third reading on the March 11 calendar.