Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
03/28/2017 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| HB1 | |
| HJR15 | |
| HB44 | |
| HCR1 | |
| HB175 | |
| HB74 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 44 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HCR 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 175 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HJR 15-OPPOSE FEDERAL ID REQUIREMENTS
[Contains discussion of HB 74.]
3:11:52 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 15, Encouraging repeal of
the REAL ID Act of 2005.
3:12:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON presented HJR 15, as prime sponsor. She
stated that the proposed joint resolution encourages the U.S.
Congress and executive branch [of the federal government] to
repeal the REAL ID Act of 2005. She explained that HJR 15
represents the reinstitution of the endorsed committee
substitute (CS) for House Joint Resolution 19, which was
introduced in 2008 during the Twenty-Fifth Alaska State
Legislature, 2007-2008. She relayed that this previous proposed
resolution was co-sponsored by 15 Representatives and 12
Senators. She maintained that HJR 15 does not represent a
partisan issue, but rather a states' rights issue that needs to
be addressed on a national level before full implementation
ensues.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON explained that the REAL ID Act of 2005
makes the state-issued motor vehicle license a federally
recognized piece of identification (ID), with the cost of
implementation being imposed on all citizens living in REAL ID
compliant states. She asserted that she introduced the proposed
legislation due to her respect for the Tenth Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution and the importance of identity security. She
added that she also introduced HJR 15 because of the number of
constituent phone calls she has received from people who are
concerned about the implementation of a system not voted for by
Alaskans and forced upon the State of Alaska through the REAL ID
Act of 2005. She asked for committee support for HJR 15.
3:15:26 PM
SHEA SIEGERT, Staff, Representative DeLena Johnson, noted that
every person who has spoken or written in favor of Alaska being
compliant with REAL ID did so based on the penalties that would
ensue for noncompliance rather than the original intent of the
Act: to prevent terrorists from taking asylum in the United
States; to prevent terrorism from occurring; and to secure the
national border. He added that those favoring compliance
testified that the cost of $1.5 million to the State of Alaska
would be less of a burden than those penalties. He indicated
that the proposed resolution creates an opportunity for
discussion regarding the actual benefits of the REAL ID Act of
2005.
3:17:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked what the consequences of
noncompliance would be for Alaska, if HB 74 did not pass.
MR. SIEGERT responded that the consequences would be that people
without a federally recognized ID would not be allowed access to
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoints,
military bases, and federal buildings requiring a federally
recognized ID.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked what the mechanism would be for
verifying alternative IDs on site. He asked, "Do people really
need to worry about travel and accessing ... sites? Will they
be able to do it with the alternative forms of ID?"
MR. SIEGERT asked Representative Knopp if he is referring to the
circumstances in which the State of Alaska has not become REAL
ID compliant.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP answered yes.
MR. SIEGERT stated that he believes there is a mechanism [for
verifying alternative IDs], but he added that the problem is
that Alaska does not have the list of recognizable permissible
IDs.
3:21:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked if there is any information that the
intent of the REAL ID Act includes the desire to have a national
ID card for the citizens of the country.
MR. SIEGERT responded that he did not find that in any of the
conveyable intent of the REAL ID Act. He stated that currently
there is a federally recognized piece of ID, which is a passport
card. He mentioned that the literature describing the original
intent of the REAL ID Act does not mention the desire for a
national piece of identification.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL commented that the passport is nationally
recognized but is more for international travel. He said he did
not know the percentage of people who have passports. He
offered his belief that it is less than half.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK responded that Alaskans have the highest
percentage of passports per capita at 65 percent.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL suggested that nationally less than 50
percent of the population have passports.
3:24:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked if the passport is a suitable
replacement for REAL ID to access airplanes and military bases.
MR. SIEGERT answered that to the best of his knowledge, yes. He
said that he defers to the Department of Administration (DOA)
for a definitive answer. He mentioned that DOA testified in its
presentation that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has
not issued the list of recognizable federal pieces of
identification.
3:26:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HJR 15,
labeled 30-LS0570\A.1, Martin, 3/20/17, which read:
Page 1, line 11:
Delete "will"
Insert "may"
Page 1, line 12:
Delete "punishing"
Insert "illegally attempting to punish"
Delete "for the actions of the state"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated that under Amendment 1, page 1, lines
11-12 would read: "Whereas noncompliance with the REAL ID Act
of 2005 may result in the federal government illegally
attempting to punish". On page 1, line 12, "for the actions of
the state" would be deleted. He explained that his reason for
deleting "for the actions of the state" is because he does not
believe the federal government's actions are being affected by
Alaska's actions.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated that she fully supports the
proposed amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX, in considering the proposed substitution
of "may" for "will" under Amendment 1, suggested that Amendment
1 be amended to state "illegally punishing" on page 1, line 12,
rather than "illegally attempting to punish", as proposed under
Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated that he would accept an amendment to
Amendment 1 that inserts "illegally" before "punishing". He
agreed that was his intent and offered that the wording of the
proposed amendment was from Legislative Legal and Research
Services.
3:30:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX moved to adopt Amendment 1 to Amendment 1,
to replace "attempting to punish" with "punishing" so that page
1, line 12 would read "illegally punishing".
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK clarified that Amendment 1 to Amendment 1
would: remove line 6, as numbered on Amendment 1, which reads
"Delete 'punishing'"; remove "attempting to punish" on line 7,
as numbered on Amendment 1; and insert "illegally" after
"government" on page 1, line 12 of HJR 15.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX withdrew her Amendment 1 to Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK moved to adopt Amendment 1 to Amendment 1 as
follows: delete line 6, as numbered on Amendment 1; insert
"illegally" after "government" on page 1, line 12 of HJR 15; and
delete "attempting to punish" in line 7, as numbered on the
Amendment 1.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that there being no objection,
Amendment 1 to Amendment 1 was adopted.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS indicated that Amendment 1, as amended, was
on the table.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for Amendment 1, as amended, to be
read to the committee.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that Amendment 1, as amended, would:
delete "will" and insert "may" on page 1, line 11; insert
"illegally punishing" on page 1, line 12; and delete "for the
actions of the state" on page 1, line 12.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON read page 1, lines 11-13, of HJR 15, as
amended, as follows: "Whereas noncompliance with the REAL ID
Act of 2005 may result in the federal government illegally
punishing individual Alaskans by placing limitation on state
residents' freedom of travel and access to federal facilities."
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS withdrew his objection. He stated that
there being no further objection, Amendment 1, [as amended], was
adopted.
3:34:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 2, which
after the correction of a typographical error ("typo") read:
ADD
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alaska State
Legislature opposes any interference by the Federal
government with the right of Alaska residents to
travel and freedom of movement, including travel by
air;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alaska State
Legislature calls on the Governor and the Attorney
General of the State of Alaska to challenge any
proposed Federal interference with the right of
Alaskan residents to freedom of movement including
travel by air, and to vigorously defend Alaskan
residents against any attempted interference with
these rights.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected for the purpose of discussion.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS withdrew his objection. He stated there
being no further objection, Conceptual Amendment 2 was adopted.
3:36:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK moved to report HJR 15, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no further objection, CSHJR 15(STA)
was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 74-DRIVER'S LICENSE & ID CARDS & REAL ID AC
4:29:35 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 74, "An Act relating to the
implementation of the federal REAL ID Act of 2005; and relating
to issuance of identification cards and driver's licenses; and
providing for an effective date."
4:30:31 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 4:30 p.m.
4:31:06 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS mentioned that two amendments had been
prepared for adoption.
4:31:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL stated that the amendment he is proposing
would increase the fee for REAL ID from $5 to $10. He cited the
costs listed on the fiscal note: $528,000 for implementation of
the REAL ID program and additional costs for a total of $1.5
million. He explained that the increase in the fee would
generate enough revenue to make the REAL ID program self-
supporting.
4:33:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL moved to adopt Amendment 1, [labeled 30-
GH1781\A.1, Martin, 3/20/17], which read:
Page 5, line 7:
Delete "$5"
Insert "$10"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected for the purpose of discussion.
4:33:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX stated that she supports the concept but
wants to find out from the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) if
doubling the fee will support the program as intended.
4:34:22 PM
LESLIE RIDLE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administration
(DOA), stated that assuming 50 percent of the population obtains
a REAL ID, the $10 [fee] would allow DOA to pay for the REAL ID
program in about five years.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked what fee would be needed for DOA to
pay for the program concurrently, making the fiscal note zero.
MS. RIDLE said she would provide that information.
4:35:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP suggested that a $20 fee would pay for the
program in one year.
MS. RIDLE answered that she assumes that to be correct.
4:35:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked if the program would be profitable
after 10 years.
MS. RIDLE responded yes, unless DOA reduced the fee. She said
the capital project would have been paid off, and DOA would
continue to pay to state money from the fees.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL suggested that his first REAL ID would cost
$10, but his second REAL ID might only cost $5.
MS. RIDLE attested that DOA would need to request a fee change
from the legislature; it cannot unilaterally make that change.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked if it is possible to include a
"sunset" date for the fees in the proposed legislation.
MS. RIDLE answered, "Probably."
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS removed his objection to Amendment 1. He
stated that there being no further objection, Amendment 1 was
adopted.
4:37:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH moved to adopt Amendment 2 [labeled 30-
GH1781\A2, Martin, 3/27/17] which read:
Page 3, line 18:
Delete "shall"
Insert "may [SHALL]"
Page 3, line 20:
Delete "shall"
Insert "may [SHALL]"
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH explained that Amendment 2 inserts
"permissive" language on page 3, lines 18 and 20, by replacing
"shall" with "may". He cited, as justification for the language
change, a letter from a constituent describing the following
situation: The constituent's wife is a Japanese national with
permanent resident status holding an alien registration ID green
card without an expiration date. She has been a fulltime
resident of Alaska since 1982. Since the green card has no
expiration date, it's validity is indefinite. The constituent
added that this places a significant burden on his wife
requiring her to renew her driver's license annually. The
constituent requested that "shall" be replaced with "may" so
that decisions for unique situations can be made at the DOA
application review level and to avoid having to make statutory
changes in the future.
4:39:43 PM
MS. RIDLE responded that DOA agrees with Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated his understanding that currently DOA
is limited to issuing yearly driver's licenses to foreign
nationals with indefinite visas. He said that the statute
currently states that DOA shall issue a license for the period
of the authorized stay; if the period of the authorized stay is
indefinite, DOA shall issue a license with a validity of one
year. He offered that someone with a driver's license for an
indefinite stay must renew it annually.
MS. RIDLE expressed her understanding that current practice is
that for a person of "indefinite stay," a five-year driver's
license is issued. She indicated that changing "shall" to "may"
would give DOA the flexibility to accommodate the person
referred to in the constituent letter.
4:42:26 PM
MARLA THOMPSON, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOE), stated that currently DMV
issues a driver's license for the period of authorized stay [of
the foreign national] or for five years for those with a
permanent card having no expiration date.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated that since DMV is currently acting
contrary to the law, the law should be changed to agree with the
current practice. He said that he supports Amendment 2.
4:43:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX cited page 3, lines 19-20, of HB 74, which
read, "If the period of authorized stay is indefinite, the
department shall issue the license with a validity of one year."
She opined that changing "shall" to "may" does not give [DMV]
the authority to issue the license for longer than one year.
She stated that "may" could mean that a license may be issued
with a validity of one year or possibly may not be issued at
all. She stated that she appreciates the issue brought forth by
the constituent and the desire to address it, but that changing
"shall" to "may" on page 3, line 20, would not accomplish that.
MS. RIDLE responded that it was the opinion of the assistant
attorney general that this change would address the issue, but
she said that she would bring up Representative LeDoux's concern
with him for further consideration.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS withdrew his objection to Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL mentioned that he agreed with Representative
LeDoux's comments, and the use of "may" would make the language
in the proposed legislation ambiguous.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS again objected to Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL stated that he does not understand the logic
behind "one year" in the proposed legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK relayed that the intent is for DOA to issue
a driver's license for the period of an authorized stay, if
known. He said that if an individual has an indefinite period
of stay, the committee wants DOA to issue a driver's license as
it would for any other Alaskan. He suggested that page 3, line
18, should read, "Unless an authorized stay is indefinite, the
department may issue the license for the period of the
authorized stay."
4:47:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL offered that a person with an indefinite
stay could leave the country with his/her valid license. He
suggested that DOA may wish to limit the duration of the license
to avoid that situation by requiring the reissue of a license
every year.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP stated that green cards are issued for ten
years; J1 visas are issued for a two- to three-month period; and
other licenses may be issued for a minimum of one year. He
suggested that there is ample time for the assistant attorney
general to address this issue and the bill language.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS withdrew his objection to Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX stated that she objects to Amendment 2
based on her belief that an opinion from Legislative Legal and
Research Services or the assistant attorney general is needed to
ensure that the amendment accomplishes that which is intended.
She recommended that the amendment be held pending this opinion.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH said his intent is to address his
constituent's concern and he supports additional legal review of
Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH withdrew his motion to adopt Amendment 2.
[HB 74 was held over.]