Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
03/24/2015 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB77 | |
| HB142 | |
| HCR7 | |
| HJR14|| HCR4 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 77 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HCR 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 14 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HCR 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HJR 14-CALL FOR US COUNTERMAND CONVENTION
HCR 4-US COUNTERMAND CONVENTION DELEGATES
9:17:03 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business was
the combined hearing of:
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 14
Making application to the United States Congress to call a
convention of the states to propose a countermand amendment to
the Constitution of the United States as provided under art. V,
Constitution of the United States; and urging the legislatures
of the other 49 states to make the same application.
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 4
Relating to the duties of delegates selected by the legislature
to attend a convention of the states called under art. V,
Constitution of the United States, to consider a countermand
amendment to the Constitution of the United States; establishing
as a joint committee of the legislature the Delegate Credential
Committee and relating to the duties of the committee; providing
for an oath for delegates and alternates to a countermand
amendment convention; providing for a chair and assistant chair
of the state's countermand amendment delegation; providing for
the duties of the chair and assistant chair; providing
instructions for the selection of a convention president; and
providing specific language for the countermand amendment on
which the state's convention delegates are authorized by the
legislature to vote to approve.
[Before the committee, adopted on 3/19/15 as a work draft, was
the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HJR 14, Version 29-
LS0249\E, Gardner, 2/19/15.]
9:19:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HCR 4, Version 29-LS0250\E, Gardner,
3/20/15, as work draft. There being no objection, Version E was
before the committee.
9:19:23 AM
STUART KRUEGER, Staff, Representative Shelley Hughes, Alaska
State Legislature, presented a sectional analysis to HCR 4 on
behalf of Representative Hughes, prime sponsor. He said the
first "BE IT RESOLVED", beginning on page 2, line 26, would
authorize the legislature "to appoint and summon delegates for
the amendment convention." He said the "FURTHER RESOLVED",
beginning on page 2, line 29, would give the legislature
authority "to decide the qualifications and total number of
delegates to send to the Convention," and the "FURTHER
RESOLVED", beginning on page 3, line 1, would give the
legislature "the ability to add or remove delegates."
MR. KRUEGER stated that the "FUTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page
3, line 6, would provide "parameters and instructions for
state's delegates at the Convention." Further, he noted that it
would prohibit delegates from voting for "any other amendments,
outside of the countermand amendment, at the Convention." He
said the "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 3, line 13, would
reserve the countermand amendment as "the only amendment for
consideration for ratification by the legislatures." He relayed
that the "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 3, line 15, would
- "upon a call for convention by 34 states" - call for
"establishing of the Delegate Credential Committee within the
Alaska Legislature, with duties listed in Section A." Further,
the Speaker of the House would appoint three members from the
House, one being a minority caucus member, and the President of
the Senate would appoint three members of the Senate, one being
a minority caucus member.
MR. KRUEGER said the "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 3,
line 24, would provide for a "replacement procedure for members
of the Delegate Credential Committee." The "FURTHER RESOLVED",
beginning on page 3, line 26, would allow for "selection of co-
chairs of the Delegate Credential Committee," which would
include one co-chair from the House, one from the Senate, and
staff. The "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 3, line 30,
would establish when the Delegate Credential Committee could
meet, and the "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 4, line 1,
would acknowledge that the Delegate Credential Committee would
"continue until the first day of the Thirtieth Alaska State
Legislature."
9:22:03 AM
MR. KRUEGER stated that the "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on
page 4, line 3, would request that the Delegate Credential
Committee be considered for reestablishment during the Thirtieth
Alaska Legislature. He pointed out that under Version E,
language had been added such that future legislatures would not
be bound by the concurrent resolution.
MR. KRUEGER said the "FURTHER RESOLVED" language, beginning on
page 4, line [7], provided for a "removal and replacement
procedure for members of the Delegate Credential Committee";
they would be "removed or replaced by the presiding officer that
appointed them." He directed attention to language within the
next "FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 4, line [18], which
provided the duties of the Delegate Credential Committee to:
decide matters by majority vote; function as the official
facilitator for the legislature; appoint delegates and provide a
committee report on selected delegates; appoint a chair and
assistant chair; properly vet and confirm delegates; issue
convention passes to delegates; notify the legislature of the
financial needs at the Convention; administer an oath to the
delegates, alternates, chair, and assistant chair; monitor
activities of Alaska's delegation; submit quarterly reports to
the legislature on events, progress, and recommendations for the
Convention; and recommend removal of a delegate or alternate for
approval by the legislature.
MR. KRUEGER directed attention to language within the final
"FURTHER RESOLVED", beginning on page 6, line [12], which would
provide for the duties of the chair of Alaska's state delegation
and the president of the Convention. The chair would be
responsible for: communicating with other state delegations to
open convention for business; identifying other legislatures
that have approved a delegate resolution; building consensus
with at least 26 state delegations to require that each state
delegation at the Convention has only one vote; requiring a
simple majority vote at all roll calls; nominating convention
officials; requiring a quorum of 26 states to conduct business;
building a consensus of at least 26 states to support sending
the countermand amendment for ratification; working to conclude
the Convention in 21 days or no longer than 180 days; and
nominating a candidate for president of the Convention from
Alaska's delegation or working to elect a president from a
delegate resolution state.
MR. KRUEGER further directed attention to language on page [8],
line [1], which listed the type of support that would be
established for the following duties of the president: securing
a vote for this delegate resolution to be the rules of order at
the Convention; focusing on the purpose of sending the
countermand amendment for ratification by the states; requesting
security measures as needed; overseeing installment of officers
at the Convention; establishing convention agenda; providing
equal time for floor discussion for all states; prohibiting
introduction of any subject other than the countermand
amendment; calling for a vote for sending a countermand
amendment to the states; reporting to 50 state legislatures and
the media on convention progress; providing formal requests,
when needed, to states for money that will be needed to carry on
business; opposing any effort to delay or modify the countermand
amendment vote; and opposing any effort by states to offer
amendments other than the countermand amendment.
9:26:56 AM
MR. KRUEGER said language beginning on page 10, line [4], would
address the duties and responsibilities of convention delegates,
which would include: complying with directives in this
resolution; following instructions of the chair and assistant
chair of Alaska's delegation; being present to vote at all roll
calls; attending all assigned sessions at the Convention;
reporting to the delegation chair the number of states in favor
of the countermand amendment; and recommending strategies to
help join 26 states in favor of the countermand amendment. The
language on page 11, line [9], would provide the text for the
countermand amendment to the United States Constitution.
VICE CHAIR KELLER noted that [HCR 4] would be heard also by the
House Judiciary Standing Committee and the House Finance
Committee.
9:28:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG observed the committee had received
letters from several different legislators, including one from a
Senator in Louisiana and a Representative in New Mexico, in
support of the legislation. He asked what the genesis of the
proposed legislation was and whether it was supported by a
particular group or organization.
MR. KRUEGER indicated that [HCR 4 and HJR 14] were brought to
the bill sponsor by a constituent, who was the president of the
Alaska section of a national, grass-roots organization called
Citizen Initiatives. The group had been traveling across the
country to promote similar legislation in other states. He
stated it was important to remember that the goal of the
proposed legislation was to limit [the Convention] to a single
issue. He said there are other states in the process of hearing
similar legislation. He said the executive director of Citizen
Initiatives, Charles Kacprowicz, had previously testified via
teleconference, and he was currently traveling from state to
state in a motor home. He said the concern of those involved in
this grassroots effort was that the sovereignty of states had
been "chipped away over time" and needed to be restored.
VICE CHAIR KELLER said Mr. Coons was the director of the Alaska
section of Citizen Initiatives and was available on line to
testify.
9:32:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SHELLEY HUGHES, Alaska State Legislature, as
sponsor, addressed questions that had been asked. She explained
that the aforementioned change made through Version E, regarding
not binding future legislatures, was made in response to a
concern raised by Representative Gruenberg at a previous
meeting. She confirmed the comment of her staff that the
legislation was backed by a grassroots effort, with neither big
money nor big names associated with it. She said that was a
unique factor. She said she had spoken with Representative
Kreiss-Tomkins about the threshold of 30 states, and she related
she had read an article from Gallop, which said there were more
"blue" states than "red." She acknowledged that that could
change, but indicated that the 30-state threshold was high,
considering there was only an 18-month window. Finally, she
said there had also been concern expressed about the possible
unraveling of the U.S. Constitution; however, she said this
effort was very specific to protect that from happening.
9:34:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES, in response to Representative Gruenberg,
reviewed that if the U.S. Constitution were amended with a
countermand amendment, there would be an 18-month window for 30
states to agree on "a specific item that's not in their best
interest."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said one issue had been over the amount
of time the states would have for ratification. He offered
further details.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES, in response, clarified that the window
did not apply to ratification, but to "enacting the mechanism."
She said the day before, State Senator Dan Sullivan had
addressed the House floor regarding federal issues, and the
minority leader brought up two issues she said she thought could
be addressed through a convention: the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
(ANWR).
9:38:27 AM
STUART THOMPSON testified in support of HJR 14 and HCR 4. He
posited the only legitimate objection to calling for a
countermand convention was that "its essence" already existed
under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the
United States; however, he stated that those constitutional
powers were "castrated by mismanagement of the slavery issue and
the desperation of the Civil War." Further, he said the powers
were "buried from view by anti-constitutional exaggeration of
federal powers through unlimited interpretation" of the General
Welfare and Do and Proper Clauses under Article II. He stated
that holding a convention and passing a countermand amendment
would restore the check and balance powers of the states over
that of the federal government.
MR. THOMPSON opined that the most serious problem in the U.S.
today was the "lack of political will by the American people to
benefit from our full, poetical heritage in seeking life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." He stated that most, if
not all, of the country's present woes could be reduced or
eliminated by applying that will, including the management of
terrorism "without suffering bankruptcy from continuous war."
He said, "This circumstance is directly traceable to encouraging
citizen apathy by perverting civics education and increasingly
using the methods of other forms of government to deal with
things." Mr. Thompson said HB 30 and SCR 1 were "attempting to
address this"; however, he urged immediate attention to "the
senseless source of political apathy enforcement in this
country." He warned that the U.S. was becoming "a has-been
nation plunging into oblivion," and he indicated this was caused
by federal overreach and bullying "arising from anti-
constitutional centralization of power enabled by neglect of
duty by the states." He said this issue was what the aim of the
constitutional convention would be.
MR. THOMPSON indicated that those against the proposed
legislation would argue that "government of, for, and by the
people" did not work in handling economic depression and
protecting people from threats such as terrorism. He opined
that Americans had been increasingly "buying this" for most of a
century and had increasingly been suffering from "the very ills
the mutating U.S. Government has promised to protect us from."
He urged people to "be real human beings instead of animals
begging for protection."
9:42:08 AM
MR. THOMPSON concluded his testimony, as follows:
As free human beings, we must face that we have to be
eternally on guard against the temptation of giving
government unsupervised trust. Our founders were very
alive to this and constructed our form of government
accordingly. We must defend their creation. I'm
sorry to say no government in history ever really
deserved even the trust that was given. Government
always has been an imperfect invention of humanity.
Cooperation between those in authority and those
governed is the only hope we have, no matter how hard
it is to do so.
9:43:11 AM
MIKE COONS, National Director, Citizens Initiative, stated that
his testimony was in response to testimony given [during the
House State Affairs Standing Committee's 3/19/15 hearing on HJR
14 and HCR 4] by assistant attorney general Michael Schechter.
VICE CHAIR KELLER noted that Mr. Schechter was available via
teleconference for response.
MR. COONS explained that Mr. Schechter had made comments that
needed to be corrected. First, he said Mr. Schechter's repeated
use of the term "constitutional convention" when referencing the
states' use of Article V was incorrect. Mr. Coons emphasized
that that use pertained to an "amendment convention." He said
the continued use of the term constitutional convention in this
matter was one of the reasons that the John Birch [Society] and
the [Texas] Eagle Forum had been so vocal and effective over the
last 30 years. He said the only constitutional convention was
in 1787, when Article V was put into the Constitution "for
purposes of amending the Constitution either by Congress or the
states."
MR. COONS said the second mistake Mr. Schechter made was in
having stated that Congress had made use of Article V, 27 times.
Mr. Coons said the actual number was closer to 100. He
explained the significance of this was that the states rejected
all but 27 proposed amendments, which was why [Citizens
Initiative] put such an emphasis on "state legislature
sovereignty in this process." Mr. Coons offered his
understanding that Mr. Schechter's third mistake was in regard
to limitation of the number of topics at a convention. He said,
"He talked about concerns if states can limit to a single
amendment. Article V is about the right of states to propose
amendments; that means one or more."
MR. COONS said Mr. Schechter had said this issue had never been
acted upon by the courts or Congress and that the Department of
Law did not know how the question of a convention would be
received. Mr. Coons emphasized that the courts had nothing to
do with the convening or running of the Convention. He said
Congress had only three duties: to keep count of the
applications per subject matter; to convene a convention upon
the 34 states making the same application; and to receive and
send the proposed amendment for ratification to the 50 states.
He added, "The rest of it is state sovereignty and the states'
rights under Article V."
MR. COONS indicated that Mr. Schechter had put forth as an
"equally valid theory" that once called, a convention created
its own rules and could consider whatever amendments it may
choose. He stated, "This is why the delegate resolution, HCR 4,
is so important. When 26 or more states - a majority - pass
this, along with the embedded countermand amendment language,
there is no option for the several states at the Convention to
create its own rules or to bring up other amendments."
9:47:00 AM
MR. COONS opined that of the two resolutions before the
committee, the most important was the one that would ensure the
safety and efficiency of the Convention by requiring 26 or more
states adopting the rules for the Convention prior to it being
convened.
9:49:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Mr. Coons if he was familiar with
the letter from Katherine Marshall [included in the committee
packet]. He confirmed that it was an opposition letter.
MR. COONS stated that he had read all the opposition letters.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that the
quotes included in the letter were of a fragment of statements
made by a solicitor general and a U.S. Supreme Court justice,
and he said he would like to see the rest of the quotes in order
to put them into context. He explained that he thought the
quotes pertained to things other than the proposed countermand
amendment, but rather to the general philosophies of those who
spoke them.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES agreed to supply the contextual text from
which the quotes were extracted.
9:52:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether the sponsor had any more
current opinions about the proposed legislation derived from
legal scholars, for example, as opposed to lay people or
politicians. He said he would like to focus on this in the next
committee of referral. He said he would like to see the best
legal thinking - pro and con - on the subject.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES said her staff could do research; however,
she reminded Representative Gruenberg that this effort had not
begun until about last year, so there may not be much available
specific to this legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if any states had passed similar
measures.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES offered her understanding that currently
17 states had sponsors, and 9 of those states introduced the
legislation.
9:54:35 AM
MR. KRUEGER, in response to Representative Gruenberg, said North
Dakota had passed its legislation through the House, and he
offered his understanding that it was currently being heard in
its Senate. In response to a question, he said he was not aware
of any specific countermand amendment law reviews. He deferred
to Mr. Coons. He said he thought the majority of the opposition
letters referred to prior efforts regarding a convention of
states, a balanced budget, and an attempt to overturn the
Citizens United decision. He explained, "They blanket
legislatures whenever there are resolutions or bills regarding a
constitutional or amendment convention being discussed, so a
number of those are related to other efforts and just directed
toward our legislature in response to these resolutions."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG added further details to his
aforementioned request for information.
9:56:40 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER noted that within the committee packet was a
compendium legislative guide on the Constitution, written by
Robert G. Natelson, whom he said he had met. He ventured that
Mr. Natelson would agree with him that this issue was
nonpartisan.
9:58:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES moved to report CSHCR 4, Version 29-
LS0250\E, Gardner, 3/20/15, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, CSHCR 4(STA) was reported out of the House State
Affairs Standing Committee.
9:59:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES moved to report CSHJR 14, Version 29-
LS0249\E, Gardner, 2/19/15, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, CSHJR 14(STA) was reported out of the House State
Affairs Standing Committee.