Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
02/11/2014 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB274 | |
| HJR18 | |
| HB275 | |
| HB199 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HJR 18 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 275 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 199 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 274 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HJR 18-CONST. AM: ELECTED ATTORNEY GENERAL
8:10:31 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 18, Proposing amendments to the
Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to the office of
attorney general.
8:10:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, as sponsor,
introduced HJR 18. He said one reason to elect the state's
attorney general would be to "sanctify" that he/she would be
"the people's lawyer." He indicated that a current AG may call
him/herself that, but in fact is the governor's lawyer. He said
the resolution is for the future of Alaska. In response to the
chair, he indicated that subsequent to 1972, constitutional
amendments must appear on the General Election ballot. He said
if the legislature ratifies this by a two-thirds vote in each
body, it would be placed on the [General Election] ballot. He
added that then it would be in the hands of the voters, in whom
he trusts.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said some people have suggested that an
elected attorney general may be politically influenced. He
stated that anyone who has watched attorney generals in Alaska
knows they already are political by nature. He said he trusts
that Alaskans would vet their candidates just as they do
legislators.
8:14:11 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked if it would be possible to have a governor in
one political party and an AG in another.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered yes, and said it currently
happens in about a dozen other states. He surmised that it
would be the will of the voters. He said he is not sure there
should be a mandate that the AG and governor are of the same
party, but suggested a stronger mandate would be that the AG
must be a person that will support the Constitution of the
United States, the Constitution of the State of Alaska, and the
people of Alaska.
8:14:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said the sponsor almost had him
convinced, "especially because of the events here recently." He
stated, "Sometimes if you don't have a direct line of
accountability in place, you might have a different outcome; you
might have more scrutiny on issues and so forth." He said early
in the history of the U.S. Constitution it was possible to elect
a Vice President of a political party different from that of the
President. He asked, "Is there a way, perhaps, that we could
close that gap, so that if people are electing a governor of one
party, they could also then have, similar to the lieutenant
governor and so forth, a ticket, or is that going to bring too
close of a ... tieback?"
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that it could be a possibility.
He said the lieutenant governor is tethered to [the governor by
political party]. He indicated that the difference between the
lieutenant governor and all other appointments is that the
lieutenant governor is elected by the people, does not require
confirmation, and cannot be removed by the governor. He said it
is part of the process for the committee to decide whether to
"propose that change here."
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON clarified, "How would that be affecting
the intent of your ... legislation?"
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE responded that he was "not sure it would
solve everything you would want it to solve," but said he thinks
"it would have the same net result, because that person would be
elected by the voters [and] could not be removed by the
governor."
8:19:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES suggested some may see an elected AG
position as a training ground for governor, which may result in
a lot more attorneys serving as governor. She then proffered
that a positive effect of HJR 18 may be that it could reduce
turnover of attorneys general. She offered her understanding
that in other states, the AG often serves a full, four-year
term, and go on to a second or third term, and that under HJR
18, there would be a two-term limit. She asked the sponsor if
he thinks [the proposed legislation] would impact the turnover
rate, and asked, "How do you see that as a plus for Alaska?"
8:20:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE replied that the average turnover of the
AG is 18 months, and HJR 18 would offer some stability, because
the AG would not be subject to "the whim of a political
disagreement." He said he does not recall a lieutenant governor
who has ever resigned. He said, "The attorney general, I think,
... probably would have ... more powers than the lieutenant
governor, [but] would not be in the line of succession though."
He surmised that morale would be raised within the Department of
Law (DOL), "knowing that they had one person" and "without the
vagaries" related to the current steady turnover of attorneys
general.
8:21:44 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked if there would be any additional cost in adding
another [position] for election on the ballot.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE indicated that the standard cost shown on
a fiscal note for printing an extra page is $1,500.
8:22:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS asked why the sponsor was proposing HJR 18
now, beside the fact that other states [have elected attorneys
general].
8:22:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that others have pushed the
measure in the past. He offered his understanding that the last
three to four attempts were made by [Democrats]; therefore, he
called the issue bi-partisan.
8:23:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he is looking forward to hearing HJR
18 in the House Judiciary Standing Committee (HJUD), and he
expressed his appreciation to the sponsor for bringing it
forward for consideration. He stated, "In a ... legal system
where crimes are against the state and the attorney general is
also the commissioner of the Department of Law, I think it's
very, very valuable for the people of Alaska to be able to know
who their attorney general is." He indicated intent to remain
open minded during the hearing of HJR 18, but said it would be
unfair to not state his bias.
8:24:53 AM
CHAIR LYNN remarked that the AG is basically a commissioner;
therefore, he asked if it would be appropriate to elect "all the
different commissioners."
8:25:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that he will not delve into that
debate. He opined that the position of AG "rises to a much
higher level." He stated that the average AG can make law
faster than [the legislature]; the opinion of an AG can nullify
a statute or regulation. He said recently the lieutenant
governor turned down a citizens' initiative, based on the
opinion of an assistant and signed by the AG, and he said it
bothers him that an assistant AG has more power than the people
of Alaska, but with no accountability.
8:26:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON noted that city and borough assemblies
and councils usually have the power to hire and fire their
attorneys. Looking back on his experience as mayor [of the City
of North Pole], he said he used whatever attorney was there and
had no issues with them; however, if he had wanted to terminate
the attorney for not representing the interest of the city, it
would have been a political battle. He questioned what would
happen if the AG was elected and turned out not to be serving
the state's best interest and it was too cumbersome a process to
remove that AG from office. He suggested following the
municipal model by having the legislature hire and fire the AG,
which might provide a quicker political process, because the
legislature would know whether the interests of the state were
being served and the governor would not be directly controlling
"that one function." He asked the sponsor for his feedback.
8:28:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, returning to Chair Lynn's previous
question, said in most states in the union, the agricultural
director or commission is elected, while in Alaska it is a
political appointment, and the only qualification is that the
person must be a citizen of the United States. Regarding
Representative Isaacson's question, he said he is not sure about
bringing the legislature into the process. He surmised that the
legislature has the ability to bring an attorney general before
it for a hearing if there are grounds to do so; however, he said
sometimes people won't show up for a hearing. For example, he
related that a previous administration chose an AG, the next
administration retained the AG, but the AG would often decline
to appear before the judiciary committees or would send
surrogates. He offered his understanding that it would require
an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska to give
the power to the legislature to "micromanage the attorney
general," which is something he said he does not want to do. He
emphasized that he wants the AG to work for the people. He
said, "I think an attorney general that's working for the people
would have no problem with the appropriation process here, just
like they don't right now." He indicated that there are critics
of the way things are working right now and the way that is
proposed in HJR 18.
8:30:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS expressed concern over the
possible loss of coordination between a governor and attorney
general of differing political parties. He asked about that
situation in other states and whether the sponsor thinks it
would be as pronounced in Alaska.
8:31:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE indicated that it would be no different
from having a governor and lieutenant governor who disagree.
For example, he recollected there was a lieutenant governor who
did not support the re-election of the governor's daughter. He
said there are conflicts in other states, such as when an
attorney general runs against the governor. He stated,
"Sometimes ... [when] trying to figure out how to stop politics
you inject more politics." He admitted that some people may
accuse him of doing just that, but noted that he has received
support from his constituents and colleagues for the proposed
joint resolution. He said there have been governors and
attorneys general who have worked well together and those who
have not, and he indicated that there are no guarantees,
irrespective of whether an AG is appointed or elected.
8:33:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES expressed appreciation to the sponsor for
pointing out how under HJR 18, the AG would be more accountable
to the people of Alaska. She said she values the public's vote
and hopes [a race for AG] would not become a beauty or public
speaking contest, because she ventured that someone who is not a
good public speaker could be a good attorney general. She
stated her support of [HJR 18] as a "healthy process." She said
she thinks it is good that the House Judiciary Standing
Committee will be considering whether there would be some way to
recall an AG. She questioned whether the race for AG would
appear on the primary ballot by party in a long list of names on
the General Election ballot.
8:35:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that under HJR 18, the process
for electing the AG would be the same as the current process for
electing the lieutenant governor. He said, "The lieutenant
governor is almost written as another exemption." The AG would
run separately or as "a triad," depending on the will of the
committee.
8:36:24 AM
CHAIR LYNN said the concept is interesting, but expressed
concern about the possibility of having a governor and AG with
opposing views. He opined that the AG, who advises the
governor, should have similar philosophical views.
8:38:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE surmised that if the chair believes that
the governor and AG should be philosophically aligned, then HJR
18 is probably not legislation he would support. He
reemphasized that the purpose of changing the AG's position to
an elected one is to make him/her a direct representative of the
people.
CHAIR LYNN remarked that all elected officials are in office to
serve the people, and he suggested that by advising the governor
on the constitutionality of proposed law, he/she is serving the
people.
8:40:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he cannot predict every possible
scenario in which there may be conflict. He stated, "I'm not
trying to cast aspersions on anybody, but it's a different
relationship when the attorney general, first and foremost, is
the governor's attorney."
CHAIR LYNN suggested at least electing an AG who shares the same
political party.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE reiterated that he is "amenable to the
deliberations of the committee." Notwithstanding that, he said,
"I think philosophy isn't something we can define by statute,
and party doesn't necessarily define philosophy as ... we know
from some of our critics."
8:42:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS stated, "I think most of us get the fact
that if we were appointed by somebody, we certainly have a
certain allegiance by who may have appointed us, versus if we're
elected by somebody else - the voters - we certainly have an
allegiance there." She proffered that the question being asked
is for whom [the AG] works.
8:42:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER offered a reminder that legal counsel to
the governor is not just the AG, because as head of the
Department of Law, the AG has deputy commissioners, many of whom
give council in specific areas. He said, "By electing ... an
attorney general, I think we would begin to see that process
better in the electorate."
CHAIR LYNN stated his assumption the [assistant attorneys
general] would not want to irritate their boss by "coming up
with opposite opinions on everything."
8:44:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON noted that Wikipedia says an AG is the
advisor to the governor, while the Encyclopedia Britannica says
the AG is "the chief law officer of the state or nation and the
legal advisor to the chief executor." He said everyone seems to
recognize that the AG is going to advise the governor, but the
AG is also the chief legal counsel for the state. He opined
that there is a distinction between the governor and the
government, the latter being of the people. At the same time,
he said, the legislature is the government, as well, and makes
laws, and in some aspects the AG needs to advise the
legislature. Further, he said, the AG looks out for
infringements of law outside the state. Representative Isaacson
said he thinks the point to consider is where the line of
accountability is to be drawn. He said he thinks this relates
back to the Seventeenth Amendment, which he recommended should
be considered as a corollary. He asked the sponsor to weigh in
on the distinction between governor and government. He further
asked how the sponsor would "educate his thinking" so that he
might "align more to this." He said he sees value in [HJR 18],
but expressed concern that it may have unintended consequences.
8:47:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he thought Representative Isaacson
made a good distinction. He said there are differences and
similarities. He said he hopes that if things are working as
they should, an AG representing the government is representing
the people's interest as well. He said that could extend to an
elected AG, who certainly would have his/her own initiatives.
He mentioned "what Attorney General Sullivan did on [Governor
Sean Parnell's] Choose Respect [campaign]." He indicated that
activism and questioning the government is seen more often from
[an elected] AG serving the public than from a "co-employee"
that does not have "that same optic or prism."
8:49:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES stated that currently the governor signs
the paychecks of state employees, and an elected attorney
general would be the boss to those working in the Department of
Law. She questioned whether the governor would have any say if
there were people in the department he/she did not feel should
be there anymore. She offered her understanding that that
relationship would be different, but questioned how.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE mentioned an appropriation process in
other states. He then said the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) does not review the court budget; the court system
presents its budget to the legislative branch. He indicated
that the proposed joint resolution outlines the implementation
process for electing the AG, and that process could be fine-
tuned. He stated that he envisions that the AG would present
the budget through the legislative arm.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES indicated she was thinking of a situation
in which the governor may have a problem with a particular AG
outside of legislative session and the appropriation process,
and asked how the relationship would be different in other
states.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE replied that other states have different
personnel rules. He added, "I don't think we'd be eviscerating
the employee rights."
8:52:45 AM
MIKE COONS noted he had submitted written testimony [included in
the committee packet]. He expressed his hope that [the AG]
would not be "a yes man or yes woman." He stated his support of
HJR 18. He directed attention to [a sentence] on page 1, line
16, through page 2, line 1, of HJR 18, which read, "A person is
not eligible to serve as attorney general unless the person
meets the qualifications for a superior court judge." Mr. Coons
stated that no one who has "run for a judge" will answer
questions regarding subjects such as criminal penalties and
minimum or maximum sentences, the stated reason being that they
may have to make a decision on one of those issues. He
questioned whether "we" would be reduced to candidates whose
campaigns focus on the length of time they have been a judge, a
lawyer, an Alaska resident, or a part of a fine family, or if
more substantive information would be given.
MR. COONS stated, "We need to know that the AG will stand for
the law, will fight back against federal overreach, and give
sound advice to the legislature without waffling as I have seen
from this existing Department of Law." He paraphrased a portion
of his written testimony, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Lastly, I struggled about this position being
appointed and vetted and approved or disapproved by
the legislature. I felt that the Governor and
Legislature were in a better position to determine the
best AG.
MR. COONS explained that his view changed as a result of
comments made by a Senator who believed he and the legislature
were, by virtue of a college education and superior knowledge on
the matter - especially concerning a constitutional amendment -
more qualified to make that decision for the voters. Mr. Coons
emphasized that he would trust his fellow voters to make a
valued decision, and he would not give up his vote.
8:55:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he appreciates the point made by Mr.
Coons, but said he does not want to confuse this with the
judicial appointment process.
8:56:53 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
8:57:20 AM
CHAIR LYNN suggested that the committee could consider an
amendment to limit the choice of AG to someone in the same party
[as the governor]; however, he said such an amendment may be
better addressed by the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
8:57:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said he wonders if conceptually it
should be the House State Affairs Standing Committee that
addresses that amendment. He indicated that if the proposed
legislation were to pass out of committee, he would recommend
that the conceptual amendment was in place. He said he sees a
lot of disruption of good governments, and he does not believe
that's what the people want. He said back when the Seventeenth
Amendment was passed, the idea was for Senators not to be
"selected out of the states," but to be voted on by the people.
He opined that "the people ultimately are the best government,"
and mistakes made by voters tend to be corrected later.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON stated that one of the values of having
a governor appoint the attorney general is that the governor has
been elected to serve according to a vision that resonated
within the voters. In order to [follow that vision], the
governor must have department heads who will "toe the line." He
said that does not always happen, and when it does not the
result is a dysfunctional government. He opined that when it
comes to matters of law, it is important to have not just a good
lawyer but one who understands the state and whose philosophy is
"right." He said if the people elect someone who is recently
from another state, and that person is charismatic and has a
great record but does not understand the issues particular to
Alaska, then the state is stuck with that AG for four years,
whereas, an appointed AG that is not working out could leave
sooner.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON opined that Alaska, at over 50 years of
age, cannot afford to "play lightly" with its future, which is
insecure at present because there are too many people in charge
that do not understand the requirements of the state's
constitution. He said he could envision how an elected AG, not
knowing the "peculiarities" of Alaska's state government, could
shut down resource development. He said the states lost their
power to control federal overreach when they lost the power to
"insert people selected by the various legislatures in to the
Senate" to protect the states' interests.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON stated:
I would say I could go along with this as long as we
at least had alignment of parties. I don't want to
see a dysfunctional government or one that's divisive
to the best interests of the state.
9:04:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS said the state is hoping to build
a large diameter natural gas line, and he wonders how the
coordination between DOL and the executive branch would work,
under HJR 18. He explained that the project is one of
unprecedented scale and, presumably, would require unprecedented
coordination. He said he also worries that the AG position
would be filled more by political ability than professional
competence. Finally, he said he thinks the AG in Alaska is more
powerful than the lieutenant governor, in terms of scope of
power and responsibility. He stated, "I ... think that's a fair
point to make, that the precedent exists. This would be moving
that further, and that's just something we should acknowledge."
9:06:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated for the record that the House
Judiciary Standing Committee, [which he chairs], would consider
an amendment on the partisan issue, removal standards, and
qualifications.
9:07:32 AM
CHAIR LYNN echoed Representative Kreiss-Tomkins' remark that
there is a difference between campaign ability and legal
ability; just because someone campaigns well does not mean
he/she will perform well in office.
9:07:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS admitted that as a "political
junky," he would relish the idea of having another campaign to
follow.
9:08:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES offered her understanding that 43 other
states elect their AG, and she said she would like to know how
many of those states require the elected AG to be of the same
party as the governor.
9:08:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said committee members had asked a lot of
good questions, and he stated his intent to address their
concerns. Regarding the concern that someone elected as AG
might not be intimately involved with Alaska, he said an AG that
is appointed does not have to be a resident of the state. He
recalled an AG that left the state right after service. He
indicated that the qualification requirements for residency and
citizenship are the same [for an AG] as for other elected
executive positions. He surmised that Representative Isaacson
might take more comfort if there was an assurance that the AG is
an Alaska resident - "someone familiar with Alaska and its
economy and our legal system, because they've lived here and
worked here." He stated that through the existing appointment
process, there have been people from other states serving as
attorneys general, some of whom were not even members of the bar
and had to secure that credential.
9:11:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report HJR 18 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HJR 18 was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.