Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/01/2004 08:03 AM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 31-INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM PETITIONS
HJR 5-CONST AM: INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM PETITIONS
MR. TIM BARRY, aide to Representative Bill Williams, sponsor of
HB 31 and HJR 5, explained to members that the two pieces of
legislation would put a constitutional amendment on the ballot
in the fall of 2004. The constitutional amendment would change
the requirements to put an initiative on Alaska's ballot. The
Constitution currently requires a petitioner to submit the
signatures of at least 10 percent of the voters at the most
recent general election and those signatures must be from at
least 27 of the 40 House districts. Only one signature from each
of the 27 districts is required. In HB 31 and HJR 5, the 10
percent requirement would remain the same but the number of
districts would increase to 30 and the signatures would have to
total at least 7 percent of the voters at the most recent
general election in each of those districts.
MR. BARRY said the legislation carries out the intent of the
framers of Alaska's Constitution who included the geographic
distribution requirement to insure that no one part of the state
could get an initiative on the ballot without support from other
parts of the state. HB 31 and HJR 5 will adjust the Constitution
to reflect demographic changes that have occurred in the state
since statehood. In 1956, three areas of the state had roughly
equivalent populations: Southeast, Anchorage, and Fairbanks.
Since then, Anchorage has become the dominant area
demographically. In addition, changes in technology make it much
easier to send petitions around the state to gather support for
an issue.
MR. BARRY told members that the National Council of State
Legislatures (NCSL) compiled a report two years ago that urged
states to adopt the geographic distribution requirement for
initiative petition signatures. He said the legislation would
not create an undue hardship for initiative sponsors. Members'
packets also include data from the Division of Elections that
shows that initiative supporters could have met the requirements
of the new legislation without much effort. He said among the 10
initiatives that have been on the ballot since 1998, sponsors
would have had to gather an average of 935 additional signatures
to comply. On average, sponsors gathered 40,000 total
signatures. Most initiatives get on the ballot without any
substantial support from any areas of the state. The Division of
Elections submitted a fiscal note with a cost of $1,500. The
Alaska Outdoor Council, the Alaska Miners Association, the
Alaska League of Women Voters and the Alaska State Chamber of
Commerce support HB 31 and HJR 5.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Barry to provide specific examples of
some of the last initiatives.
MR. BARRY referred to a chart in members' packets and pointed to
the billboard initiative in 1998 and the districts with 7
percent of the signatures.
CHAIR SEEKINS noted a large group of districts in the middle
always seems to have at least 7 percent, but the districts on
either end do not.
MR. BARRY said the bulk of signatures are being gathered on
every initiative in districts 10 through 29.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked if the rural districts are not being
included.
MR. BARRY said that is exactly correct. He noted it is a lot
simpler to get an initiative on the ballot today without leaving
the Anchorage - Mat-Su Valley area.
CHAIR SEEKINS said each district has the same number of voters,
roughly, so a lot of people in the state are not being asked
their opinion in the first place.
MR. BARRY agreed and added that he has heard a lot of testimony
from folks from rural areas who do not feel they are being
represented in this process at all.
SENATOR OGAN said he supports these pieces of legislation. He
said he found the advertising for the billboard initiative to be
very offensive because it depicted scenic roads in Alaska
covered with billboards while the real issue had to do with
directional signs placed by the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOTPF). He said his district is made up
predominantly of strip development and businesses must be
located along the highway because no signs are allowed to lead
customers elsewhere. However, on private property, a business
owner can put up as many ugly signs as he wants to. He said the
people voted for strip mall development that looks ten times
worse than a directional sign because of poor advertising. He
said his point is that ballot issues are often decided on
emotion and a sound byte that has nothing to do with the truth.
SENATOR OGAN then said if the voters pass this constitutional
amendment, the people who have been disingenuous about various
issues might wake up a little bit. He said obviously managing
wildlife is the legislature's responsibility and should not be
done at the ballot box. He asked whether the sponsor has
considered narrowing the bill to wildlife issues only.
MR. BARRY said he is not comfortable answering that question
right now.
SENATOR OGAN responded:
Because while people may wish to be misled with
emotional advertising that has nothing to do with the
truth, some issues, an issue as important as wildlife,
as much as people in rural Alaska depend on wildlife,
I think that's a higher cause [indisc.] than not
having mini-billboards, or whatever you wanted to call
them. But it has a very real effect on people in rural
Alaska, for example, you know, these wildlife
initiatives. We're talking about bear baiting now ...
I went up and talked to those guys and I'm sure
everybody I talked to was a professional signature
gatherer because they didn't know anything about the
issues. You know, I would sit there and debate it with
them and then after about 10 minutes I'd tell them,
you know, I'm the chairman of the Senate Resources
Committee and sorry, you're wrong. These people just -
they don't have a dog in the fight other than getting
a buck a signature and I find that offensive. I'd
champion people if people were willing to get out
there and believe in it themselves and put the sweat
equity into it. I think that's great. Maybe we should
just make it illegal to hire professional - of course
that's another issue, I'm sure.
CHAIR SEEKINS took public testimony.
MR. MYRL THOMPSON, chairman of the Ogan So Gone recall, told
members he represents 2,200 registered voters in District H. He
said, "With all due respect, gentlemen, you guys, you just don't
get it. This petition and initiative bill is a travesty. You
guys, when is the last time any of you ever collected a petition
signature - even one? And I just bet about none of you ever
have...."
MR. THOMPSON said the legislature passed a law regarding
billboards and that issue was reversed by a ballot initiative by
82 to 18 percent. He asked the committee to quit passing bills
that are against the people of Alaska and support Alaskans for a
change.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Mr. Thompson if he fundamentally
disagrees with requiring signatures from a broader geographic
area in the state.
MR. THOMPSON said he fundamentally disagrees with the
legislature changing something that isn't broken. He said the
spirit of the [initiative process] was to allow the people to
get the job done when the legislature does not. He pointed out
this legislation does not change the fact that 10 percent of the
voters in the most recent election must sign. A person must
accompany a petition booklet to a village so the 10 percent
requirement is most important - those signatures do not have to
come from every single village. This legislation makes it
tougher on the people that do the job that legislators should be
doing.
SENATOR THERRIAULT countered that it sounds like Mr. Thompson is
arguing against the current language in the Constitution, which
requires that votes be obtained from a larger geographic area.
MR. THOMPSON replied, "No sir, I'm not arguing against that. I
think the bill is fine the way it is. It's worked fine for
Alaskans. It just puts the measure on the ballot and the voters
of Alaska are the people that make the decision and that's the
way it should be in a democracy."
MR. ROGER GAY, a resident of Big Lake, said he opposes this
legislation. He believes legislators should leave the
Constitution alone - its job is to support and defend the
Constitution, not to change it. This proposal is
unconstitutional and unconstitutional thoughts should not be
"rolling around" in legislators' minds. If the people want to
change the Constitution, they can get petition signatures and
change it from the outside. He said he has seen more bills in
this legislature that propose to change the Constitution in
order to put forward pet ideas, which are patently
unconstitutional. He stated, "When it comes to integrity and
disingenuousness, you guys are pros, especially you Mr.
Ogan...."
CHAIR SEEKINS interrupted Mr. Gay and said as chair of the
committee he could not allow Mr. Gay to cast any aspersions on
any member of the legislature or any other individual. He asked
Mr. Gay to keep his comments on the merits of the bill but
cautioned that if he gets personal, he will not be allowed to
testify before the committee.
MR. GAY said the constitutional provisions as they stand now
work just fine. They allow the people to be heard without having
to go before people who will not hear them. He said it is unjust
and improper for legislators to put roadblocks in the way of the
people's ability to move initiatives along. He said the
legislature should not add one cent of cost to the expense of
getting an initiative on the ballot. He said this legislation
will have a chilling effect on the initiative process.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Mr. Gay if he understands that the
legislature is the only body that can put a constitutional
question on the ballot according to the Constitution. He said
the charge Mr. Gay has leveled against legislators is completely
erroneous.
MR. GAY said his point is that the Constitution works well as
written and he believes that when the legislature, in order to
pass a specific piece of legislation, finds it necessary to
change the Constitution, the legislature is thinking
unconstitutional thoughts. He said the legislature should
concentrate on supporting the Constitution as written rather
than on ideas that are unconstitutional.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said in that case, the state would have no
permanent fund and the idea of a permanent fund couldn't even be
entertained. He repeated that he does not believe Mr. Gay
understands the mechanism in the Constitution that calls for the
legislature to consider those very things Mr. Gay considers to
be unconstitutional. The legislature is only empowered to ask
the voters if they want to change the Constitution.
MR. GAY said he is not so much opposed to the legislature adding
provisions to the Constitution but he gets upset when the
legislature reverses constitutional provisions.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said the current wording in the legislation
requires two-thirds [of districts]; this legislation adds to
that by requiring three-quarters [of districts].
CHAIR SEEKINS maintained that the legislature does not change
the Constitution; it only poses the question to voters. In
addition, he noted our government is a democratic republic, not
a democracy. He said the Constitution itself lays out the
process to amend the Constitution.
MS. CHERYL JEBE, President of the League of Women Voters of
Alaska, gave the following testimony.
The League of Women Voters is a non-partisan political
organization that encourages the informed and active
participation of citizens in government and influences
public policy through education and advocacy. Any
person of voting age, male or female, may become a
member.
In 2001, the state League completed a study and
adopted a position to support the existing initiative
process with several recommendations for improvement.
The one on point here supports a formula for at least
50 signatures in each of two-thirds of the legislative
districts in order to reflect statewide interest in a
measure.
While these bills have differing numbers of signatures
in each district and the number of districts to be
included, the concept is consistent with the League's
recommendation that initiatives reflect more statewide
interest in a measure. This is currently lacking when
only 1 signature in most districts is allowable. I
have no further comments and would entertain any
questions.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Jebe why the League's membership
believes more signatures spread out over a larger geographic
area is good for the process.
MS. JEBE replied that the League feels the rural areas are not
being represented when it comes to having initiatives put on the
ballot. Many times the central part of the state moves
legislation forward without asking for opinions from rural
areas.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Jebe her opinion of the allegation
that the Legislature is acting improperly.
MS. JEBE said she does not believe that is true. She said the
committee's discussion on how the process works is accurate.
SENATOR OGAN noted the Electoral College prevents states with
small populations from being disenfranchised in the presidential
election process. He believes this constitutional amendment
parallels that system by keeping the popular will of a
particular geographic area from disenfranchising other areas of
the state.
MS. JEBE agreed that the rural areas of the state are not
adequately considered in the initiative process.
CHAIR SEEKINS said the legislative process is inclusive in that
every legislator's vote must be considered so an urban community
can pose a question and dominate the rural areas.
MS. JEBE agreed that is the League's concern.
SENATOR OGAN commented that individuals with a certain political
agenda often write initiatives yet the use of one word, such as
"may" instead of "shall," can have huge consequences. Semantics
are often dissected during the legislative committee process to
look for unintended consequences. He believes the framers of the
Constitution anticipated that because they gave the legislature
the authority to amend an initiative or repeal one after two
years. So, while they wanted the people to be able to make law
by initiative, they recognized that those laws would not get the
same amount of scrutiny. He said he doubts most people read the
entire initiative they sign and understand the effect that
certain words can have.
MS. JEBE said she believes a certain number of people sign a
petition so that a measure will get on the ballot to allow other
people to have a say on it. She said she quit doing that since
she became involved in the League's study.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced that with no further participants,
public testimony was closed. He asked that members consider HB
31 first.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said the two-thirds requirement in the
Constitution shows that the framers saw the need for geographic
representation in the initiative process. Mr. Barry testified
that the state's population trends warrant a change to three-
quarters to guarantee a better protection of the current
demographics.
TAPE 04-12, SIDE B
SENATOR THERRIAULT said he does not feel that passage of this
legislation raises the bar to the extent that initiatives will
be stopped.
SENATOR OGAN asked Chair Seekins if he intends to hold the
legislation in committee today.
CHAIR SEEKINS said unless he hears a compelling reason to do so,
he is willing to take action on it today.
SENATOR OGAN requested that the bill be held in committee so
that he could discuss with the sponsor narrowing the scope of
the legislation to wildlife management initiatives.
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed to hold it as the Judiciary Committee is
the last committee of referral for HB 31.
SENATOR OGAN noted that the rural-urban divide has prompted a
lot of discussion and he believes the current initiative process
exacerbates that issue in regard to wildlife management. He
believes this legislation will go a long way to send a positive
message to rural Alaskans. He pointed out the legislature acts
as the assembly for the unorganized areas of the state and,
because of that, the legislature should re-enfranchise the rural
areas with this new process.
CHAIR SEEKINS commented that some people have used the
initiative process to advance their political agendas, including
members of the legislature, who have used that process to
readdress legislation passed by the entire body. He supports
this legislation because he believes the slight additional
burden of including the rural areas in this process is
reasonable. He said he prefers not to narrow the bill to
wildlife management as other issues affect rural communities.
SENATOR THERRIAULT supported Senator Ogan's request to hold the
bill in committee. He indicated an egregious example is the East
Coast's attempt to control wildlife management in Alaska but he
doesn't necessarily agree that splitting the process is a good
idea.
SENATOR ELLIS said he does not plan to support anything that
leads to greater expense, more difficulty, or limitations on the
public to petition the government to redress grievances through
the initiative process. He asked the testifiers from the Mat-Su
to recognize a variety of opinions about this legislation in the
legislature and not to paint all members with the same broad
brush.
CHAIR SEEKINS repeated that he will not allow testifiers to cast
personal aspersions on anyone during the Senate Judiciary
Committee hearings. He then adjourned the meeting at 9:03 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|