Legislature(2017 - 2018)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/15/2017 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| SB55 | |
| SB5 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 55 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 5 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 5-POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION LIMITS/PROHIBITION
2:12:05 PM
CHAIR COGHILL reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SB 5. [CSSB 5(STA), 30-LS0112\U, was before the
committee.]
2:12:19 PM
SENATOR MEYER, sponsor of SB 5, introduced the legislation
paraphrasing the following sponsor statement:
In an effort to restore public trust and reduce
corruption, or the appearance of corruption, in our
campaign finance system, in 1996 the Alaska
legislature passed sweeping campaign finance reforms.
Included in legislation was a prohibition on all
contributions by lobbyists to candidates outside of
their own election district. What was not anticipated
or addressed by the 1996 reforms, and is an issue that
arose during this last election cycle, is the ability
for a lobbyist to contribute to a political action
group that is controlled by a legislator or other
candidate for the legislature. This loophole in the
law allows a sitting legislator, or a candidate for
the legislature, to solicit, raise, and disperse funds
from lobbyists, on behalf of a group that they
control, thus circumventing the limit on lobbyists'
contributions to candidates. Further, our state
statutes explicitly state that a legislator may not
solicit or accept funds in order to influence a state
election during a regular or special session, however,
there is no clear prohibition against a political
action group controlled by a legislator doing so. In
addition, SB 5 includes a prohibition on dispersing
funds during a legislative session.
Senate Bill 5 will amend our state statutes to bolster
our campaign finance laws by:
1. Closing the loophole that allows lobbyists to make
political campaign contributions to groups headed by
current lawmakers and candidates for the legislature
outside of their district, and
2. Preventing groups controlled by a legislator or
candidate for the legislature from soliciting,
raising, or dispersing funds during a regular or
special legislative session.
This measure is intended to protect against
corruption- or the appearance of corruption- and
restore the public's confidence in our campaign
finance structure.
2:15:26 PM
EDRA MORLEDGE, Staff, Senator Kevin Meyer, said the original
version of SB 5 contained a drafting error and the State Affairs
CS corrected it. She suggested that the easiest way to explain
the drafting error is to go through the sectional summary. She
reviewed the following:
Section 1 is a new section which places restrictions
on solicitation and acceptance of contributions by
groups controlled by legislators or candidates for the
state legislature during a legislative session.
The original version also included in that section the
restriction on expending funds during a legislative
session, which we still have in the bill. It's just
that those were both contained in the same section in
the original bill and they needed to be broken apart
because they're two different sections of this
chapter.
Section 2 is rewritten to prohibit lobbyist
contributions to candidates for the state legislature
or to groups that are controlled by a sitting
legislator or a candidate for the legislature.
Section 3 regards prohibited contributions and this is
the new section. This section makes an exception for
contributions by lobbyists eligible to vote only in
that candidate's district, which is part of current
law but for the purpose of drafting this bill, they're
broken out into these new sections.
Section 4 is limitations on expenditures. This is a
new section pertaining just to these groups controlled
by legislators or candidates for state legislature.
This basically brings these groups in line with how
individual candidates operate, which is no
expenditures during a legislative session.
Section 5 is the definition section. One sentence or
some words that were added to the introduction of the
definitions, which is on page 2, line 28 and 29, the
drafter of the bill put in the words "unless the
context requires otherwise" and then goes on into the
definitions. That's just to remove any sort of legal
ambiguity that might be construed by the definitions
so they apply just to this chapter.
CHAIR COGHILL summarized that, at this point, contributions are
within context of what is in current law.
MS. MORLEDGE replied that's correct.
2:19:24 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO referred to the language in the new subsection
(j) on page 2, lines 9-11, and questioned whether the phrase "is
eligible to vote" is tight enough to prohibit certain lobbyist
contributions. She pointed out that there is a difference
between eligible to vote and able to vote.
She also asked Ms. Morledge if she had discussed with the
drafter whether the word "controlled by" that appears on page 1,
line7, and page 2, line 2, is the appropriate word. "I think
that the intent is that the person is a part of this political
action committee, but 'controlled by' indicates they might have
just control of it but they may not be listed as a participating
member."
MS. MORLEDGE said the language regarding lobbyist contributions
is existing law. Currently it is in subsection (g) and SB 5
places it in a new subsection (j). She added, "We didn't
contemplate, perhaps, a lobbyist moving to a new district."
Regarding the second question, she said she did ask for
clarification and guidance from the drafter as to how the Alaska
Public Offices Commission might interpret the word "controlled
by."
CHAIR COGHILL noted that Mr. Bullard with Legal Services and
Heather Hebdon from APOC are available to answer questions.
2:22:52 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked Mr. Bullard if the words "controlled by"
is adequate for the intention of the bill.
ALPHEUS BULLARD, Legislative Counsel, Legislative Legal
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, said the phrase
"controlled by" is not defined for purposes of the bill so it is
left to APOC to define it in regulation. "If the legislature
chooses not to provide a specific definition for the purposes of
the bill's provisions, I don't think it's too great a grant of
legislative discretion to allow the commission to decide what
'controlled by' might mean in this instance." He added that it
could also be defined on the facts of each case.
2:24:16 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the bill would still allow
political action committees to contribute to legislators who are
controlling PACS.
MS. MORLEDGE said yes.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked: 1) if contributions from out of
state would still be prohibited, and 2) what the contribution
limits would be.
MS. MORLEDGE deferred the question to APOC.
2:25:05 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how much money a PAC that is set up
by a legislator can accept from out of state and if they can
accept money from an out of state PAC.
HEATHER HEBDON, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC), Anchorage, Alaska, confirmed that a
legislator who has formed a PAC could accept money from other
groups. As far as groups based outside of Alaska, there are
limits that pertain to those as well. Generally, groups outside
of Alaska are not permitted to contribute to a candidate, but
they could form the group and register the group from out of
state. However, 90 percent of their contributions must be from
Alaska residents. It would not change the group's contribution
limits. They would be able to accept $500 from individuals, but
90 percent of their contributions must be from Alaska residents.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if political action committees
outside of Alaska, could contribute that 10 percent of outside
funds.
MS. HEBDON answered yes but they would be limited to a $1,000
contribution limit from that outside PAC.
2:28:02 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a legislator could contribute
money to his/her campaign or make an independent expenditure for
his/her campaign, using funds from the political action
committee he/she controls.
MS HEBDON answered yes. Contributions a legislator makes to
his/her own campaign would be limited to $1,000, whereas making
independent expenditures on behalf of his/her own campaign would
be unlimited.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said his understanding has been that a
legislator could not coordinate between independent expenditure
groups and the candidate. "If a legislator controls the PAC,
isn't that coordination?"
MS HEBDON replied that is part of the concern APOC has with the
bill. It does not define "controlled by."
2:29:24 PM
CHAIR COGHILL said that is an excellent point and something the
committee should ponder
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the sponsor if there is a reason for
not simply banning these groups from forming.
MS. MORLEDGE opined that banning these groups would infringe on
an individual's First Amendment right to free speech. The
sponsor researched that initially and placing sideboards seemed
to be the best option. There was no contemplation of overhauling
the entire campaign finance structure. The intent was to close
the loophole that came to light last year.
2:30:56 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted he saw a legal opinion that talks
about legitimate government interest in restricting campaign
contributions, and it seems that it would be a legitimate
government interest to say candidates cannot have their own
political action committees. He asked to hear from Mr. Bullard.
MR. BULLARD explained that if a legislator forms a PAC and it
makes contributions or expenditures that help the legislator's
own campaign, then that group will be defined as the candidate
under AS 15.13.400(1)(A) or AS 15.13.400(1)(B)(v). Contributions
to that group will be aggregated with contributions to the
candidate for purposes of the campaign finance statutes. That
group is no longer just a political action committee, it is a
political action committee that is one and the same with the
candidate's campaign. That situation is addressed in existing
law.
CHAIR COGHILL observed that it's not a question of arm's length
because once they do that combination they can't be considered
an independent expenditure.
MR. BULLARD replied that is his conclusion. As to whether it
would be a narrowly tailored remedy to prohibit all legislative
PACs, he said the only rationale accepted by the U.S. Supreme
Court for limiting campaign contributions is corruption and the
threat of corruption. A PAC that can skirt existing contribution
limits to legislators poses the threat of corruption. For
example, if a legislator wishes to raise money towards a ballot
initiative, he didn't believe a court would find that preventing
the existence of a group that relates to that ballot proposition
could be construed to be narrowly tailored to prevent
corruption.
2:34:39 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the bill could be narrowly
tailored enough to prohibit collecting campaign contributions to
give to other candidates.
MR. BULLARD said he hadn't looked at that question and didn't
know what a court would find.
2:35:29 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO referenced page 1, line 9, and page 2, lines 4
and 26, that specifically talks about the legislature. She asked
if he had contemplated using a broader term, such as a person
who files for public office.
MR. BULLARD suggested he ask the sponsor.
2:36:47 PM
SENATOR MEYER said he wouldn't be opposed to changing the
reference.
SENATOR COSTELLO suggested changing the wording on page 2, line
4, to reference "an individual who becomes a candidate."
CHAIR COGHILL suggested replacing the words "the state
legislature" to "public office." He opined that transparency of
reporting requirements are a large part of accountability.
Finding no further questions, he stated he would hold SB 5 in
committee for further consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 5 - Fiscal Note.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Summary of Changes (D to U).pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Written Testimony Shively.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Written Testimony Willis.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Contribution Limit Chart.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Group Definition AS 15.13.400.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Sectional Summary.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 5 - Legal Memorandum.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB 55 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB 55 - Bill Contents.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB 55 - ACJC Recommendations.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB 55 - Sectional Summary.pdf |
SJUD 2/15/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |