Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/10/1993 01:00 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HJR 9 - VOTER APPROVAL FOR NEW TAXES Number 031 REP. TERRY MARTIN, PRIME SPONSOR OF HJR 9, thanked Chairman Porter for promptly scheduling HJR 9. He explained that HJR 9 would give the citizens of Alaska a right that citizens of many other states enjoyed: being part of the body that determined taxation issues. He stated that Alaska's constitution was quite restrictive regarding taxation powers. REP. MARTIN noted the growing awareness among Americans of the powers of taxation, saying that through initiatives and referenda, the voters were taking control of state budgets. REP. MARTIN commented that in most states, 2/3 of each house of the legislature had to approve a tax. However, in Alaska, only a simple majority was required. He said fifty percent of states that required a super-majority of each house to approve a tax also required voter approval of that new tax. REP. MARTIN stated that the power of taxation was a balancing act between legislators and the people. He said people did not mind paying taxes as long as they knew that their money was going to something worthwhile. He mentioned that in the most recent election, there had been at least 13 amendments on various states' ballots that severely limited legislators' powers of taxation. Number 136 (Rep. Gail Phillips arrived.) Number 147 REP. GREEN asked about who had the powers of taxation in other states. Number 160 REP. MARTIN replied that most states required the vote of a super-majority of both houses of the legislature. In contrast, HJR 9 would only require a simple majority vote of both houses, plus approval of the voters. Number 200 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Rep. Martin to explain his comment that the public did not mind being taxed, so long as the tax was going to be spent on something worthwhile, in light of the state's prohibition on dedicated taxes. Number 220 REP. MARTIN replied that although taxes could not be dedicated, legislators would feel obligated to spend tax funds on certain programs, according to the will of the voters. Number 250 REP. PHILLIPS commented that she had met with Judge Stewart, one of the framers of the Alaska constitution, the day before. They had discussed the legislature's role in determining taxation and the importance of the legislature not giving up that responsibility. She commented that at times the public jumped on the bandwagon about certain issues without undertaking the thorough review of those issues that the legislature did. She asked Rep. Martin if he had discussed HJR 9 with Judge Stewart. Number 271 REP. MARTIN responded that although he had spoken with Judge Stewart about other issues, they had not discussed HJR 9. Rep. Martin said he differed with the judge on the issue of the people controlling taxation. (Rep. Nordlund joined the committee.) Number 314 REP. PHILLIPS asked if Rep. Martin had looked into granting the public the right to rescind a tax. Number 323 REP. MARTIN replied that such a proposal would probably need to be addressed in another piece of legislation. He mentioned the state of California's now-defunct "crazy cracker" tax, which was rescinded by the voters. REP. MARTIN said that he did not believe that legislators did a better job than the people in deliberating the issues. He stated that Alaska was rife with educated people who discussed issues before them on the ballot. Number 371 REP. NORDLUND asked Rep. Martin how many other states had provisions similar to HJR 9 in their constitutions. REP. MARTIN replied that approximately 50 percent of the states allowed the voters to approve taxation. Before that approval, however, about 80 percent of the states required a 2/3 vote of each house of the legislature. Number 391 REP. NORDLUND asked if HJR 9 pertained to the imposition of new taxes or the raising of existing taxes. Number 399 REP. MARTIN replied that HJR 9 pertained to raising personal taxes or imposing a new personal tax. He noted that the resolution had nothing to do with corporate taxes or any other taxes, except for those that impacted an individual's income. Number 404 REP. NORDLUND said that he was concerned that individuals could not get adequate information on which to base their votes for or against a tax. He noted that taxation issues were often very complex. He commented on the superficiality of campaign issues and said that he was skeptical about the ability of the public to glean substantial, meaningful messages from a 30-second television commercial. Number 425 REP. MARTIN commented that the voters of Alaska must be very intelligent as they had elected both himself and Rep. Nordlund. He said that Alaskans discussed the issues among themselves, citing the constitutional convention ballot question as an example. Number 450 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Rep. Martin if this proposal had been before the legislature in past years. Number 454 REP. MARTIN responded that he had introduced the resolution for the past six or eight years. Number 457 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Rep. Martin how far along in the legislative process his proposal had gotten in the past. REP. MARTIN replied that where HJR 9 was today was the furthest that his proposal had ever been in the legislative process. Number 478 RESA JERREL, representing the NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES (NFIB), testified in support of HJR 9. She commented that she had asked the NFIB members, in an annual poll, if the state should increase taxes or decrease spending. She said 93 percent of respondents answered that the state should decrease spending. She stated that in 1990 a poll question regarding reimposition of the personal income tax had resulted in 80 percent of respondents voting against the proposal. Number 497 MS. JERREL commented that the year before, a representative from Fairbanks had introduced a series of income tax bills. She said that in response to an alert she issued to her members about a gross receipts tax, she received two and one-half pounds of faxes and letters urging the legislature to oppose the tax. She said that the gross receipts tax bill was not difficult to understand. She added that people could be educated through various means. Number 526 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Ms. Jerrel if her poll question bore a direct correlation to HJR 9. Number 531 MS. JERREL responded that her poll did not include a question specifically relating to HJR 9, but she believed there to be an indirect correlation between the poll question and Rep. Martin's resolution. Number 537 REP. PHILLIPS asked Ms. Jerrel if her organization had ever discussed the ability of the public to rescind taxes. Number 541 MS. JERREL replied that she did not recall any poll questions on the subject being asked since 1985. Number 550 REP. GREEN made a motion to pass HJR 9 out of the Judiciary Committee with individual recommendations. Number 553 Hearing no objection, CHAIRMAN PORTER ordered that HJR 9 be moved out of committee with individual recommendations. Number 558 CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that HB 69 was now before the committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|