Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/12/2001 08:14 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 200 - DRUNK DRIVING VICTIMS REMEMBRANCE DAY Number 2778 CHAIR COGHILL announced that the next item of business before the committee would be HOUSE BILL NO. 200, "An Act establishing July 3 as Drunk Driving Victims Remembrance Day." He put before the committee a committee substitute [Version C]. REPRESENTATIVE FATE moved the adoption of [Version C] as the working document before the committee. Number 2807 CHAIR COGHILL said he took out the portion of HB 200 mandating that the flag be lowered, as it is his personal feeling that the section would set a precedent that he was not sure he wanted to set. He explained that he did not want to diminish the remembrance of the drunk driving victims, "but every other time we lower the flag by statute in Alaska, it's with regard to veterans or police who have lost their life in service." He said that he does not want to diminish the tragedy of the loss of other victims, but "I think if we start down the road of lowering the flag for every one, we will end up diminishing that," he said. So he was reluctant to put the flag lowering in statute as HB 200 proposes. Instead, his CS asks the governor to make a proclamation to commemorate Drunk Driving Victims Remembrance Day, and the governor can lower the flag as he or she wishes. Number 2869 REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD objected to adopting the CS. He said he thinks the flag lowering does not diminish anything and raises awareness, and that the original bill is the proper way to memorialize the victims of drunk driving. Number 2895 CHAIR COGHILL said his intent was not to dishonor anybody, but to raise the level of honor by making the governor do it by proclamation. He said he thought that would result in better publicity than doing so by statute. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she tended to agree with Chair Coghill. She said she did not wish to demean the people who have worked so hard on HB 200 and to whom it means so much. But she thinks there are a lot of ways that would be more effective than a statutory flag lowering to get out the message of Drunk Driving Victims Remembrance Day. "I think the proclamation does it," she said. She thinks if the people who are behind HB 200 request it, once the legislature has this day set in statute, it is likely that the governor would lower the flag. TAPE 01-38, SIDE B REPRESENTATIVE JAMES also concurred with Chair Coghill that the governor's making the proclamation in a press relapse will prompt more media coverage than if the legislature mandated the flag-lowering "and it just happened." She said she supports the CS and hopes the proponents will be comfortable with this way of commemorating their loss. Number 2915 REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD asked: What's wrong with us making a stand and making this statement here that we believe that ... drunk driving is wrong and do everything in our power to make that statement as strongly as we possibly can? Why would we have to wait on the governor to lower the flag? Why can't we as a legislature, as a policy-making group, say that this is something that we feel rises to the level that we need to moralize it and make people aware of it. I believe that this is the least that we can do. CHAIR COGHILL said he appreciates that and thinks it is an excellent point. "We are asking the governor to make a proclamation," he said, "and I think that ... the precedent that I'm reluctant to set could eventually diminish that very thing that you're trying to do." Number 2872 REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said: This is a very difficult decision to make just for the fact that we don't want to diminish in any way what's happened and the fact that the people that have come here and worked real hard to the end that this could happen. But I do agree with you. Right now, the only time the flag has been lowered ... is when it's connected with some kind of a veteran type thing, right? CHAIR COGHILL clarified that the flag is lowered by statute only for that type of observance. However, there are many other times that it is lowered by proclamation for a variety of different people and events, he said. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON also expressed concern about setting a precedent. While she acknowledged that remembrance of drunk driving victims was a very good reason for lowering the flag, she pointed out that other groups could request the same thing and "you could see the flag lowered so many times that ... people don't even think it's a big deal." While she understands that to be the policy issue, she said she is really torn because she can see both sides. Number 2772 CHAIR COGHILL concurred that it is an emotional issue. "We're doing it over people who have at random been killed and who have become true victims," he said. He repeated that it is not intent to diminish that at all. Number 2740 REPRESENTATIVE FATE moved to report HB 200 as amended out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD maintained his objection to the CS. A roll call vote was taken on the CS. Representatives Fate, James, Stevens, Wilson, and Coghill voted for the CS to HB 200. Representatives Crawford and Hayes voted against the SC for HB 200. Therefore, the CS to HB 200 was adopted. There being no objection, HB 200 as amended moved out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee. [CSHB 200(STA) moved from committee.] CHAIR COGHILL declared a brief at-ease at 9:07 a.m. The meeting was called back to order at 9:12 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|