Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 106
02/21/2008 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB54 | |
| HB261 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 261 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 318 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 261-CLEAN ELECTIONS 9:47:00 AM CHAIR LYNN announced that the last order of business was SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 261, "An Act establishing a program of public funding for the financing of election campaigns of candidates for state elected offices, to be known as the Clean Elections Act." 9:48:11 AM REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LeDOUX, Alaska State Legislature, offered a brief introduction commencing the hearing on SSHB 261. She stated that money is often a corrupting influence in politics, which is the reason for the proposed legislation. In response to a question from Chair Lynn, she confirmed that she is not associated with the Clean Elections Initiative. 9:49:16 AM SUZANNE HANCOCK, Staff, Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Alaska State Legislature, presenting SSHB 261 on behalf of Representative LeDoux, prime sponsor, stated that clean elections enhance democracy and affirm the principle of "one person, one vote" by "reducing the disproportionate influence of large contributors on elections and enabling citizens of all backgrounds to participate equally in the democratic process." She said the proposed legislation would strengthen public confidence in government, while eliminating the danger and perception of corruption cause by the private financing of election campaigns. Furthermore, it would increase the accountability of elected officials to the voting public. MS. HANCOCK reported that seven states and two cities have already incorporated clean election laws. She said clean elections benefit incumbents who are planning to run for reelection, because their time is freed to deal with issues rather than trying to fundraise. She noted that in 2006, candidates for state offices in Alaska and those groups who supported them raised more than $17 million. She said the process of fundraising is time consuming and "it's a lot easier to go to special interest groups who can provide you with an opportunity to garner many dollars rather than go to individual people for small amounts of money." She reported that one state with a clean election law in place has found that contributions have increased by 34 percent, and by checking zip codes, it is apparent that those contributions are coming from the poorer members of society rather than the richer ones. She stated, "So, this is an opportunity for people to actually pick their candidates, and for candidates who normally wouldn't have an opportunity to run to be able to pursue public office." 9:51:42 AM CHAIR LYNN asked the bill sponsor if she would consider an amendment to change the use of the term "clean elections" to "some other less proscriptive word." REPRESENTATIVE LeDOUX responded that she does not care what the bill is called; it is the substance that matters. 9:53:04 AM TIM JUNE, Chair, Alaskans for Clean Elections, said Alaskans for Clean Elections is the sponsor of the Alaska Clean Elections Initiative. In response to Chair Lynn, he said currently both related House and Senate bills share the same language as the initiative. He reported that 33,500 signatures on the initiative were recently submitted to the Division of Elections, of which 24,000 were verified. He also said verification was made regarding the minimum requirement of 34-40 districts. Mr. June said Alaskans for Clean Elections conducted a poll in March 2007 that showed that 70 percent of Alaskans support clean elections. MR. JUNE related that the clean elections system is a voluntary system of campaign funding, which is law in the following seven states: Arizona, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Vermont. Maine and Arizona have had a clean elections system in place for over a decade, with 84 and 42 percent of candidates "using clean elections," respectively. He stated that it is a "tried and true" system. MR. JUNE said Alaskans for Clean Elections took the following steps in coming up with its initiative: wrote 22 drafts, including six former legislators in the drafting committee; worked with legislators to get a bi-partisan bill in both the House and Senate - bills which have been vetted through Legislative Legal and Research Services, the Office of the Lieutenant Governor, and the Office of the Attorney General; and used the best of the laws of the aforementioned seven states to come up with the language of the initiative. MR. JUNE named the following endorsers of the Clean Elections Initiative: constitutional fathers Victor Fisher and George Rogers; former governors Walter J. Hickel and Tony Knowles; leaders from five of the six political parties; Mayors Whitaker, Botelho, Dapcevich, and Shields; U.S. Senate candidates David Cutty and Ray Metcalf; U.S. House candidates Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Ethan Berkowitz, Dianne Benson, and Jake Metcalf; the National Education Association (NEA); the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW); AARP; and the Alaska Women's Political Caucus (AKWPC). 9:56:19 AM MR. JUNE pointed out that the clean elections system is not only funded by general funding, but also by the $5-dollar contributions that candidates collect to qualify for clean elections. He continued: ... If we assume 100 percent participation, that would include about $310,000 ... an election cycle from those $5 contributions. It also includes any leftover campaign money [that] goes back in the clean election fund, and then any fines that are levied. So, I would just like to make a note that that was not included in the fiscal note. MR. JUNE, regarding the fiscal analysis, noted that in both the Alaska Public Offices Commission's (APOC's) fiscal note and the one prepared for the Clean Elections Initiative, the annual cost was notated as $6 million a year. He said, "The cost in here is reflective of an election cycle, which happens every two years, so please be sure to divide that by two when you're calculating that cost." MR. JUNE stated that the cost of a clean elections system would be 3.4 percent of an annual $10 billion-plus capital operating budget, which he said is "a percent of a percent of a percent." He said the incremental cost of a clean elections system has nothing to do with the budget but everything to do with good government. He asked the committee to support SSHB 261. He read a quote from U.S. Senator and Presidential candidate John McCain, as follows: Any voter with a healthy understanding of the flaws of human nature and who notices the vast amount of money solicited and received by politicians cannot help but believe that we are unduly influenced by our benefactor's generosity. 9:58:23 AM MR. JUNE, in response to Chair Lynn, confirmed that a question on the aforementioned poll was whether the person taking the poll favored clean elections. In response to a follow-up question from Chair Lynn, he said no one was asked if they favored dirty elections. 9:58:47 AM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said both the opening language of the bill and the presentation given describe how a clean elections system enhances democracy and improves the opportunity for voters to participate. He asked Mr. June to expand on that topic and to talk about how clean elections seem to affect the rate of reelection for incumbents. MR. JUNE responded that in terms of enhancing democracy, the State of Arizona has had a 34 percent increase in voter turnout in non-Presidential election years and a 7 percent increase in Presidential election years since enacting [its Citizens Clean Elections Act]. Furthermore, he noted that Arizona's rate of contributions to political campaigns has increased three-fold. He echoed Ms. Hancock's testimony that the more accessible $5- dollar contribution has shifted the political donor class from the upper-middle class to the middle and lower classes. MR. JUNE, regarding incumbency, reported that a study done in California showed that 98 percent of that state's political races were determined by who raised the most money in his/her campaign. In Arizona, he said, incumbency before the state adopted a clean elections system was about 96 percent. He offered his understanding that the rate after Arizona's clean elections system was in place was approximately 76 percent. He said, "So, it has some effect on it, but I would not say a devastating effect." He stated that incumbents obviously have the advantage of getting their names in the news and getting known for the bills they sponsor, and there is not way to affect that advantage. He said, "What this does is really just try to take the money element out of determining who wins and election, and instead put it in terms of issues and voters." 10:02:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE BERTA GARDNER, Alaska State Legislature, announced for the record that yesterday the House passed a bill prohibiting all fundraising for political purposes during a legislative session. She said the bill was broadly supported for good reason: "the appearance and potential conflict of raising money during the session." She said she thinks a clean elections system would help address that issue. She asked everyone to consider the following question: "If it's inappropriate and damaging to the process to collect money on January 15 - the first day of session - why is January 14 significantly different?" She added that that is a rhetorical question. [SSHB 261 was heard and held.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|