Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/09/1995 03:35 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SSTA - 3/9/95
SJR 16 LIMIT LEGISLATIVE SESSION TO 90 DAYS
SENATOR SHARP brings up SJR 16 as the next order of business before
the Senate State Affairs Committee and calls the first witness.
Number 540
SENATOR TAYLOR, prime sponsor of SJR 16, states he personally
supports SB 90, the bill heard in the Senate State Affairs
Committee immediately prior to SJR 16.
SENATOR DUNCAN asks Senator Taylor if he really supports SB 90.
SENATOR TAYLOR responds he does, and comments the legislature
hasn't had the guts to vote itself a salary since he got here.
SENATOR TAYLOR states SJR 16 is very simple; it would reduce the
length of legislative session to 90 days. Senator Taylor
introduces an amendment to SJR 16 which would require the
legislature to recess in order to hold committee meetings at
different locations throughout the state.
SENATOR DUNCAN asks what per diem rate legislators would get during
the recess.
SENATOR TAYLOR responds the legislature would get to set the per
diem rate; SB 90 (the Public Officers Compensation Commission) has
not been adopted yet.
Number 524
SENATOR LEMAN comments he likes SJR 16 as introduced, and though he
does not dislike the idea of recessing to hold interim meetings, he
thinks the amendment to SJR 16 would have the effect of not
shortening session at all. Senator Leman would support the
amendment if session was still constrained to 90 days total.
Number 509
CHAIRMAN SHARP adds he has a problem with the amendment, in that he
wouldn't care to continue renting an apartment in Juneau and not
receive per diem for it during a break in session.
Number 500
SENATOR TAYLOR states the subject of SJR 16 has been around before,
but has never gotten enough of a consensus in the legislature to
pass. He states that after having talked with several legislators
about their concerns, he thought the amendment might soften the
approach in order to get us closer. He is not fixed on any
particular dates or times. The amendment was just an idea that has
been floated, and he thought the committee should have the benefit
of it.
Number 495
SENATOR DUNCAN comments he likes the approach of the amendment. It
is important to get the legislature out to other communities and to
allow the committees to take action while holding meetings in other
communities. So he likes the amendment, but he doesn't like the
original bill. Senator Duncan is concerned that shortening session
would hand more power to the bureaucracy; it would weaken the
representative branch of government.
Number 474
SENATOR LEMAN disagrees with Senator Duncan's conclusion that
shortening the length of legislative sessions would erode the power
of the legislature, because legislators remain legislators, even
when not in session. He thinks it will cause the legislature to
get its' work done in a shorter time frame. It will be a little
more rigorous; there will probably be fewer weekends and fewer
three-day weekends. Senator Leman thinks if short sessions can
work in Wyoming, they can also work in Alaska, because the two
states have a lot in common.
SENATOR DUNCAN thinks there will be an erosion of power with
shorter sessions. If he was a lobbyist, he would love a shorter
session, because it puts it in the hands of people whose main job
is to make sure something doesn't happen. Senator Duncan does not
think Alaska is comparable to Wyoming. However, he appreciates the
approach of the amendment and wants to work with Senator Taylor on
improving access to the legislature.
Number 430
CHAIRMAN SHARP states SJR 16 will be rescheduled.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|