Legislature(2013 - 2014)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/28/2014 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR22 | |
| HJR10 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HJR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 22 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 28, 2014
1:35 p.m.
1:35:41 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Austerman called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Alan Austerman, Co-Chair
Representative Mark Neuman, Vice-Chair
Representative Mia Costello
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Les Gara
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Lindsey Holmes
Representative Cathy Munoz
Representative Tammie Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bill Stoltze, Co-Chair
Representative Steve Thompson
ALSO PRESENT
Daniel George, Staff, Representative Bill Stoltze;
Representative Peggy Wilson, Sponsor.
SUMMARY
HJR 10 CONST. AM: TRANSPORTATION FUND
CSHJR 10(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
"no recommendation" and with one new fiscal
impact note from the Office of the Governor.
HJR 22 FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
HJR 22 was REPORTED out of committee with "no
recommendation" and with one previously published
zero fiscal note: FN1 (LEG).
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 22
Requesting the United States Congress to call a
convention of the states to propose amendments to the
Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal
restraints on the federal government, limit the power
and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit
the terms of office of federal government officials;
and urging the legislatures of the other 49 states to
request the United States Congress to call a
convention of the states.
1:36:17 PM
Co-Chair Austerman relayed that HJR 22 had been previously
heard by the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, SPONSOR, discussed that the
resolution proposed to hold a convention of the states. She
detailed that Alaska wanted to be a part of the convention
if 35 states all passed the resolution. She elaborated that
following the passage of the resolutions the legislature
would determine the number of delegates it wanted to send
and which issues it wanted the delegates to speak on. She
noted that if delegates could be replaced with alternates
if they did not speak the way the legislature wanted. She
addressed the concept of a "runaway" [runaway
constitutional convention] and relayed that legislatures
had control over the topics; once an amendment was finished
if 35 delegates voted yes it would return to the state
legislatures. Subsequently the issue would need approval
from 38 states. She stated that there were numerous checks
and balances.
Representative Costello asked if a convention would be
limited to the items listed in the resolution.
Representative Wilson replied in the affirmative. She
expounded that legislatures could narrow the scope further
and did not have to speak on the issues.
Representative Costello did not believe there was a
provision for states to rescind a call for a convention.
She believed that the states would have to call for a
convention on the same topic in order to be counted
[towards the 35 states]. For example, if two states called
for a convention on term limits and other states called for
a convention unrelated to term limits, the states calling
for a convention on term limits would not be counted. She
believed the list in the states' "call" would determine the
convention agenda.
1:39:08 PM
Representative Wilson shared Representative Costello's
understanding of the issue. She detailed that if
resolutions differed Congress would have the ability to
determine that the resolutions did not match [closely
enough]; therefore, resolutions like HJR 22 had been
drafted similarly in other states. She noted that it would
be difficult for the resolutions to all make it through the
states' House and Senate. She stressed the importance of
making the states' resolutions as similar as possible.
Representative Gara had asked for a legal opinion on
whether a runaway constitutional convention could occur. He
recalled that the U.S. Constitution left open the
possibility that a convention would not be limited to the
topics passed by the states. He detailed that per language
in the U.S. Constitution after the circumstances happened a
constitutional convention would be called. He was uncertain
how the legal opinion read and would share it with
committee members.
Representative Wilson explained that the resolution
designated that Alaska wanted to be at the table if 35
other states passed similar resolutions. She stated that it
was not necessary to talk about each of the items outlined
in the resolution. She elaborated that the legislature
would need to create legislation specifying how delegates
would be chosen (states only received one vote), and which
specific topics would be included. She stressed that the
convention would not be able to discuss items outside of
the realm specified by the state legislatures. She
explained that 35 states would be required to accept the
amendment once it was put to a vote at the convention.
Subsequently, the issue would return to the state
legislatures; at that time 38 legislatures would be
required to pass the amendment without making any changes.
She reiterated that it was up to the State of Alaska to be
as specific as it chose.
1:42:06 PM
Representative Gara communicated that he would share the
legal opinion with Representative Wilson.
Co-Chair Austerman commented that his personal preference
would be to concentrate on balancing the federal budget.
The number of different issues proposed in HJR 22 gave him
pause. He noted that he had discussed his concerns with the
sponsor previously.
Vice-Chair Neuman MOVED to REPORT HJR 22 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note.
Representative Costello OBJECTED for discussion. She
pointed to the one previously published zero impact fiscal
note from the Legislature.
There being NO further OBJECTION, HJR 22 was REPORTED out
of committee with "no recommendation" and with one
previously published zero fiscal note: FN1 (LEG).
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 10
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State
of Alaska creating a transportation infrastructure
fund.
1:43:51 PM
DANIEL GEORGE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE,
discussed the changes in the proposed CS compared to the
House Judiciary Committee version (28-LS0133\N). He began
with page 1, line 14 where the date July 1, 2014 had been
changed to July 1, 2015. The second change appeared on page
2, line 2 where the words "from a studded tire tax" were
inserted following the words "from a tire tax." The third
change appeared on page 2, line 6 where the word "fifty"
replaced "50." The final change appeared on page 2, lines 7
and 8 where the words "studded tire taxes" were inserted
following the words "tire taxes."
Vice-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT the proposed committee
substitute for HJR 10, Work Draft 28-LS0133\C (Martin,
2/26/14).
Co-Chair Austerman OBJECTED for discussion.
1:45:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON, SPONSOR, relayed that she
agreed with the changes included in the CS. She hoped the
bill would report out of committee.
Representative Gara weighed in favor of protecting the
state's savings and funding transportation on an annual
basis. He surmised that if the goal was to get $80 million
out of the fund annually that $2 billion would need to be
deposited into the fund. He pointed out that in the current
and past fiscal year the state's capital budget for
transportation projects totaled $123 million; operating
costs for the facilities would cost an additional $300
million. He discussed the benefit of setting aside specific
funds for transportation compared to the burden of a
quicker depletion of the state's $17 billion in savings. He
detailed that under the governor's proposal the state's
savings would be reduced to $13 billion or $14 billion;
with the transportation fund the savings would be further
depleted to $11 billion. He noted that the depletions did
not include dealing with deficits in future years. He
recognized the work that went into the bill, but he did not
believe it was fiscally prudent. He trusted that the
legislature would fund transportation as a priority. He
mentioned competing funding needs from areas such as
education, energy projects, rural development, job
training, the university, and other. He believed the bill
had every right to go to the House floor for a vote.
1:49:37 PM
Representative Costello thanked the bill sponsor for her
work. She noted that the bill was limited to the creation
of a transportation fund. She shared that if the idea had
been proposed five to ten years earlier she would not have
been inclined to support it given that the state had been
in a better fiscal situation. However, she was supportive
of the fund given that the state was facing tougher
financial times in the upcoming decade. She observed that
under the current administration there had been three miles
of road built. She discussed that in good financial times
the state was spending money to pave and upgrade roads;
however, it was not investing in new roads providing access
to resources. She discussed that the development of the
state's natural resources would help Alaska financially.
She expressed her support for the concept. She had
participated in the subcommittee over the interim that had
traveled to various communities to hear about support for
the fund.
Co-Chair Austerman WITHDREW his OBJECTION to the adoption
of the CS. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Costello discussed the new fiscal impact
note totaling $1,500 from the Office of the Governor. She
noted that the cost could increase to $22,000 related to
the possibility of a ballot printing requirement.
Vice-Chair Neuman MOVED to REPORT CSHJR 10(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
There being NO OBJECTION, CSHJR 10(FIN) was REPORTED out of
committee with "no recommendation" and with one new fiscal
impact note from the Office of the Governor.
ADJOURNMENT
1:53:41 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 1:53 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR 10 - Version C - HFIN CS.pdf |
HFIN 2/28/2014 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 10 |