Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/14/2012 08:30 AM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB284 || HB285 | |
| HB250 | |
| HB358 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 250 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 358 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 284 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 285 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 358
"An Act relating to an advertising campaign in support
of opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for
development."
Co-Chair Stoltze opened the meeting and reported that HB
358 was unchanged.
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to ADOPT HB 358, 27-LS1406\M as
a working document. There being NO OBJECTION is so ordered.
9:41:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LANCE PRUITT, SPONSOR presented HB 358 as an
advertising campaign to open the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge (ANWR) for development. The bill would direct the
state to contract with a qualified trade organization to
advertise opening the coastal plain of ANWR for oil and gas
exploration and development. The Alaska National Interest
Land Conservation Act of 1980 prohibited the leasing or
other development leading to the production of oil and gas
from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He stressed that
domestic demand for oil continues to rise. The proposed
trade organization could communicate that new technology
had greatly improved the environmental impact on drilling
and that oil and gas development can coexist in Alaska's
arctic. He concluded that state revenue depends on resource
development; therefore it makes sense to promote
responsible development to benefit Alaskans.
DIRK CRAFT, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE LANCE PRUITT, informed
the committee that the legislation has been modeled
directly after the state's tourism marketing contract
statute.
9:44:21 AM
Representative Wilson asked if there was a needed amount to
make the program effective. Representative Pruitt responded
that a qualified trade organization would determine the
amount. The amount would be whatever the organization would
be willing to bring to the table, and then the state would
match that amount. He expected it would be less than
$500,000 from a small organization. If a larger
organization was interested then the amount would be
larger, but the expected amount would probably be under one
million for the first year.
Representative Gara agreed it seemed reasonable to set the
record straight on ANWR. He expressed his concern that some
individuals may reap a short term advantage, but give
Alaska a long term disadvantage. He suggested that ads
taken out may target certain political candidates in the
lower 48. The short term benefit could be for candidates to
use the cause for personal gain to obtain more votes, but
the long term damage would be other individuals hating
Alaska for interfering in another state's politics. He
believed some politicians, who were for opening ANRW, would
support it, but, once elected, makes sure it was never
opened. He would like accurate information about ANWR to
set the record straight in the lower 48, but cautioned
against targeting candidates.
Representative Pruitt indicated he would be willing to talk
with Representative Gara. He avowed that the intent was not
to influence political candidates, but to provide an
opportunity to address constituents in the United States
about the information. He wanted to make sure people had
accurate information on ANWR.
9:48:38 AM
Co-Chair Stoltze appreciated Representative Gara's point.
He wondered if the state should be spending money on
initiatives and referendums and stressed that it could be
counterproductive to use state money in that manner. He
indicated the desire to move the bill out of committee, but
a few policy questions needed to be cleared up.
Representative Pruitt agreed.
Representative Costello indicated she was trying to
understand the logistics of the bill. She questioned if
there would be proposals from organizations, the state
would identify the winning proposal, and then match the
proposal's amount. She asked how that would work and how
the money would be raised. Representative Pruitt answered
that the trade association, determined by the Department of
Commerce, would provide the proposed money amount that they
received from many different sources. The money would be
from the private sector and the organization would be
responsible for acquiring the money; it would not be on the
state. The legislature then would appropriate the money to
match the amount. The ownership of the marketing campaign
would be shared jointly by the trade association and the
state. Representative Costello asked if an amount had been
determined for the campaign. Representative Pruitt
specified that that he did not want to put a limit on the
marketing group. The plan was to market Alaska's resources
and bring more money into the state. He believed Alaska
should celebrate if a group wanted to put a large amount of
money into the campaign. He did not want to limit what the
private sector could bring in. He emphasized that it was a
50/50 program. He reiterated that to date the number was
closer to $500,000. Representative Costello pointed out
that there are organizations presently working on the issue
and wondered if the bill included coordination to prevent
duplication of efforts. Representative Pruitt stated that
there was nothing in the bill that specifically states
there must be coordination to avoid duplication. He was not
aware of any other campaign on a national scale regarding
the issue.
9:54:18 AM
Co-Chair Stoltze appreciated that on page 1, line 13-14
where it states a direct ownership of the campaign.
Representative Neuman indicated his confusion on how the
funding mechanism worked. Representative Pruitt revealed
that the bill was modeled after the tourism campaign. The
Department of Commerce does not have a monetary fund, but
the trade association would approach the department with a
monetary amount and then money would be appropriated by the
legislature up to 50 percent. Representative Neuman
summarized that the state would enter into a contact with a
qualified trade association, the association would get
funding for lobbying for ANWR, and then ask the legislature
for matching funds. Representative Pruitt emphasized that
the plan was for a marketing campaign not lobbying. He
continued that the association would find the money; it
would not be on the state.
Representative Neuman voiced his concern over the state's
monetary obligation and would like to see a limit put on
for budgetary reasons. He would like further information on
the state's obligation.
Co-Chair Stoltze reiterated that the monetary number would
be subject to appropriation. Representative Neuman
questioned if the state does not match the amount by 50
percent, what then would happen.
9:59:46 AM
Representative Pruitt responded that choices would be made.
The campaign could still go forth even if the state does
not match the 50 percent.
Representative Doogan wanted an idea of how much money has
been put into the ANWR Arctic Power. Representative Pruitt
did not know the exact amount. Arctic Power money is used
for individuals to talk directly to people on Capitol Hill.
The purpose of the campaign was not to reach people in
Washington, but to communicate information to the people
who elect the representatives to Washington.
Representative Doogan wanted the Arctic Power information.
He expressed his frustration with all the indeterminate
fiscal notes. He asked for a projection, not just a blank
check. He did not believe it responsible to keep rubber
stamping indeterminate fiscal notes.
Co-Chair Stoltze interjected his concerns about the
political perimeters and the monetary limits of the bill.
He indicated that he would like to see a committee
substitute to answer the questions rather than deal with
the questions on the floor.
Representative Doogan revealed he was not trying to block
the bill, but would prefer more parameters. The fiscal
notes are not telling the committee anything.
10:06:27 AM
Vice-chair Fairclough revealed a letter of support from the
local Teamsters 959 indicating that there could many trade
organizations that might want to move the message forward
concerning ANWR. A limit or an amount was needed so there
would be a real number to evaluate. She wondered if the
campaign would qualify for a film tax credit. She voiced
her concern of an outside organization crafting the ANWR
message. She again mentioned the Arctic Power organization
was a very small office, but the state was receiving a lot
for the money invested. She stated though that it was hard
for one person to reach all the powers in Washington with
the message. Arctic Power has been trying to get factual
information out to the public, but some in the organization
may not know enough. There needs to be a consistency in the
message. She suggested that maybe Arctic Power was
targeting those who already support ANWR development,
instead of targeting those who are opposed. She indicated
her support for an advertising campaign, but suggested it
be a consolidated effort with the Arctic Power board. She
reported that 41 U.S. senators voted for development of
ANWR and it was a prime time to advertise for arctic
development.
10:13:09 AM
Representative Edgmon indicated he would be supporting the
bill, but was skeptical on what it will produce. He
believed it would take a broad scale message. Alaska is
viewed nationally as the last frontier so he is dubious on
what will be achieved. He also indicated some technical
questions.
Co-Chair Stoltze asserted that Alaska is not in a good
position just having the oil industry is the spokesmen. The
state needs to speak as a state policy issue. HE would
prefer Alaskans to speak with their own voice.
HB 358 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB250 Don Eller Letters.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 250 |
| HB 358 Supporting Documents - Support Letter Alliance 3-2-12.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 358 |
| HB 358 Supporting Documents - Arctic Power 49 ANWR bullet points.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 358 |
| HB 358 Supporting Documents - AK Chamber Letter of Support.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 358 |
| HB 358 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 358 |
| HB 358 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 358 |
| HB250-DCCED-AEA-03-09-12-Recent-Updated.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 250 |
| HB 250 Letters.PDF |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 250 |
| HB358 Teamsters Letter.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 8:30:00 AM |
HB 358 |