01/17/2024 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB129 | |
| HB4 | |
| HJR7 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 129 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
January 17, 2024
1:05 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Sarah Vance, Chair
Representative Jamie Allard, Vice Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative David Eastman
Representative Andrew Gray
Representative Cliff Groh
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 129
"An Act relating to voter registration; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 129(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 4
"An Act relating to elections."
- MOVED CSHB 4(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 7
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
requiring payment of a dividend to eligible state residents.
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 129
SHORT TITLE: VOTER REGISTRATION
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
03/22/23 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/22/23 (H) STA, JUD
03/28/23 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/28/23 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/30/23 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/30/23 (H) Heard & Held
03/30/23 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/27/23 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
04/27/23 (H) Moved CSHB 129(STA) Out of Committee
04/27/23 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/28/23 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) 5DP 2AM
04/28/23 (H) DP: CARPENTER, C.JOHNSON, ALLARD,
WRIGHT, SHAW
04/28/23 (H) AM: ARMSTRONG, STORY
05/01/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/01/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/01/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
05/03/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/03/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/03/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
05/05/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/05/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/05/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
05/08/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/08/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/08/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
01/17/24 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 4
SHORT TITLE: ELECTIONS: REPEAL RANKED CHOICE VOTING
SPONSOR(s): VANCE
01/19/23 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/23
01/19/23 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/23 (H) STA, JUD
05/02/23 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/02/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/02/23 (H) MINUTE(STA)
05/09/23 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/09/23 (H) Moved HB 4 Out of Committee
05/09/23 (H) MINUTE(STA)
05/10/23 (H) STA RPT 4DP 1DNP
05/10/23 (H) DP: ALLARD, CARPENTER, WRIGHT, SHAW
05/10/23 (H) DNP: STORY
05/10/23 (H) FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD
05/10/23 (H) BILL REPRINTED
05/10/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/10/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/10/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
05/11/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/11/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/11/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
05/12/23 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/12/23 (H) Moved CSHB 4(JUD) Out of Committee
05/12/23 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
01/17/24 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HJR 7
SHORT TITLE: CONST AM: PERMANENT FUND DIVIDEND
SPONSOR(s): WAYS & MEANS
03/01/23 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/01/23 (H) W&M, JUD
03/06/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
03/06/23 (H) Heard & Held
03/06/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
03/08/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
03/08/23 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/11/23 (H) W&M AT 9:00 AM DAVIS 106
03/11/23 (H) Heard & Held
03/11/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
04/24/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/24/23 (H) Heard & Held
04/24/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
04/25/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/25/23 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
05/10/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
05/10/23 (H) Moved CSHJR 7(W&M) Out of Committee
05/10/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
05/12/23 (H) W&M RPT CS(W&M) NEW TITLE 6DP 1NR
05/12/23 (H) DP: ALLARD, TILTON, GROH, MCKAY,
MCCABE, CARPENTER
05/12/23 (H) NR: GRAY
05/15/23 (H) MOTION FOR JUD TO WAIVE UNIFORM RULE 23
FAILED Y26 N13 E1
01/17/24 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
JAKE ALMEIDA, Staff
Representative Sarah Vance
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave an overview of HB 129, on behalf of
the House Judiciary Standing Committee, sponsor by request,
chaired by Representative Vance; gave a summary of changes in
the proposed CS for HB 4, Version U, on behalf of Representative
Vance, prime sponsor.
NOAH KLEIN, Attorney
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHB 4, Version U.
KENDRA BROUSSARD, Staff
Representative Ben Carpenter
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for CSHJR
7(W&M), on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime sponsor.
EMILY NAUMAN, Director
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHJR 7(W&M).
ALEXEI PAINTER, Director
Legislative Finance Division
Legislative Agencies and Offices
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHJR 7(W&M).
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:05:09 PM
CHAIR SARAH VANCE called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. Representatives Carpenter, C.
Johnson, Eastman, Gray, Groh, Allard, and Vance were present at
the call to order.
HB 129-VOTER REGISTRATION
1:05:58 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 129, "An Act relating to voter registration; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was
CSHB 129(STA), as amended on 5/8/23.]
1:06:29 PM
JAKE ALMEIDA, Staff, Representative Sarah Vance, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the House Judiciary Standing
Committee, sponsor by request, chaired by Representative Vance,
gave an overview of CSHB 129(STA). The bill required the
Division of Elections (DOE) director to send letters to confirm
addresses of all voters not domiciled in the state. In
addition, it implemented an easier system to cancel voter
registration and adopted best practices for verifying Alaskan
voter status with multiple databases. CSHB 129(STA) would give
clear direction to help clean up the voter rolls and provide
accurate representation of the Alaskan electorate to build trust
in the electorate system. He noted that last session, Amendment
1 and Amendment 6 were conceptually amended and adopted. The
bill was before the committee for final consideration.
CHAIR VANCE sought final comment from members of the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN questioned how passage of the bill would
impact the voter roll. He expressed concern that inactive
voters had the same ability to vote as active voters.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD moved to report CSHB 129(STA), as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB
129(JUD) was reported out of the House Judiciary Standing
Committee.
1:11:25 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:11 p.m. to 1:16 p.m.
HB 4-ELECTIONS: REPEAL RANKED CHOICE VOTING
1:16:23 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 4, "An Act relating to elections." [CSHB 4(JUD)
was moved from committee on 5/12/23; in committee packets was a
proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 4, Version 33-
LS0094\U, Klein, 1/15/24.]
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD moved to rescind the committee's action on
5/12/23 in reporting CSHB 4(JUD) out of committee. There being
no objection, it was so ordered.
1:17:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 4, Version 33-LS0094\U, Klein, 1/15/24,
as the working document.
1:17:35 PM
JAKE ALMEIDA, on behalf of Representative Vance, prime sponsor
of HB 4, presented the summary of changes in Version U [included
in the committee packet], which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Section 5: New section deletes the disclosure
requirements of intermediaries and the certification
from the campaign treasurer. This was a new campaign
finance disclosure section implemented by Ballot
Measure 2 of 2020.
Section 6: New section deletes a campaign finance
requirement and relating to contributions while acting
as an intermediary, as implemented by Ballot Measure 2
of 2020.
Section 8: New section deletes the inclusion of
television broadcast and internet advertisements from
keeping the "paid for by" language on the screen for
the entirety of the ad, as implemented by Ballot
Measure 2 of 2020.
Section 11: New section deletes penalties for failure
to report under AS 15.13.050(a), as implemented by
Ballot Measure 2 of 2020.
Section 66: New additions to the repeal section are AS
15.13.050(r), 15.13.090(g), 15.13.110(k),
15.13.400(5), 15.13.400(15), and 15.13.400(19).
1:19:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER objected to the adoption of Version U
for the purpose of discussion.
CHAIR VANCE sought questions from members of the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether Version U would repeal
Ballot Measure 2 in its entirety.
1:20:54 PM
NOAH KLEIN, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency (LAA), answered yes, Version U would bring the
status of Title 15 back to where it was before Ballot Measure 2
was enacted.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about the rescinded action and
asked why the bill was before the committee again.
CHAIR VANCE explained that last session, she did not transmit
the bill packet to the Chief Clerk's Office because she had a
question about the fiscal note. After additional conversations
with the public, she decided to bring the bill back before the
committee for further work.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked why [the state] would want less
transparency in its elections.
CHAIR VANCE conveyed that from the public's perspective, Ballot
Measure 2 made the election process more difficult. She said
she was acting on behalf of her constituents who were in favor
of "one person one vote."
1:22:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked about the disclosure requirements in
political advertisements and whether that would have increased
transparency.
CHAIR VANCE shared her understanding that the "paid for by"
disclosure was still required; however, displaying it for the
entirety of the advertisement was not obligatory. In response
to a follow up question, she said money disclosures were still
required, but those limitations were different than the ones
imposed by Ballot Measure 2. She added that the courts declared
campaign contributions as political free speech. Consequently,
she opined that individual contributions should not be limited.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked how disclosing which organization
donated money was a limitation on free speech.
CHAIR VANCE clarified that she was speaking about individual
contributions. In response to a follow-up question, she stated
that individuals were still required to disclose their campaign
contributions.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether organizations were required to
disclose campaign contributions.
MR. KLEIN said the campaign finance provisions would be returned
to how they were prior to Ballot Measure 2. He offered to
follow up with the requested information.
1:26:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GROH observed that Version U deleted the language
in Section 6 regarding dark money. He asked whether people in
the bill sponsor's district had indicated that they liked dark
money and requested for an increase in its roll in Alaska's
elections. He shared that people in his district were concerned
about the role of intermediaries and dark money in the state's
elections.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER made a point of order not to impugn
Alaskans' beliefs. He suggested that constituents were not on
trial and that questions should be concentrated on the policy in
the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE GROH asked whether the legislation was intended
to increase the role of dark money in Alaska.
CHAIR VANCE said her intent was to return the election process
to "one person one vote." She shared that Alaskans felt
deceived by Ballot Measure 2 in regard to campaign
contributions.
REPRESENTATIVE GROH said he was struggling to understand why the
language making it more difficult for dark money to come into
Alaska elections was being removed.
1:29:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked who was allowed to vote in a
democratic primary versus a republican primary prior to the
passage of Ballot Measure 2.
MR. KLEIN explained that parties' bylaws determine whether their
primaries are limited to members of their party or open to
everyone. In addition, parties can choose to have joint
primaries.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD expressed her appreciation for the bill
and opined that repealing Ballot Measure 2 was necessary.
1:32:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN shared his understanding that prior to
the passage of Ballot Measure 2, Alaska had some of the more
robust voting regulations. After the measure passed, ranked
choice voting (RCV) and the new reporting requirements put the
state in a "league of its own." He opined that returning to a
heavily regulated process would not eliminate transparency.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER removed his objection to the adoption
of Version U.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY objected.
1:34:52 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Carpenter, C.
Johnson, Eastman, Allard, and Vance voted in favor of adopting
CSHB 4, Version U. Representatives Gray and Groh voted against
it. Therefore, Version U was adopted by a vote of 5-2.
1:35:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD moved that the House Judiciary Standing
Committee zero out the attached fiscal note for HB 4 from the
Division of Elections (DOE), Office of the Governor, OMB
Component Number 21. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
CHAIR VANCE explained the purpose of DOE's fiscal note was to
return [the state] back to the prior system of voting. She
argued that it should not take a full campaign to teach people
"one person one vote." She said she would leave it up to the
House Finance Committee to determine the appropriate amount.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN recalled that there was an outstanding
request for additional funds for an educational component on
RCV. He sought to confirm that with passage of Version U, that
funding would not be necessary.
CHAIR VANCE answered, "Correct." She sought final comment from
committee members.
1:38:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY stated that Version U deliberately
obfuscated large campaign donations by allowing donors to hide
their contributions behind intermediaries. Alaskan people
deserve to know the true source of campaign donations and who is
influencing elections, he opined. He said the bill was an
attempt to undo the will of Alaskans who voted for Ballot
Measure 2.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD shared her understanding that Ballot
Measure 2 was funded by dark money. She opined that returning
to the prior system of voting was "the right way to do it,"
adding that the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) would
handle the concerns about dark money.
REPRESENTATIVE GROH reiterated his opposition to Version U and
bringing the bill back before the committee to "gut" the
campaign finance requirements.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN said he was glad to be voting on a bill
that would repeal Ballot Measure 2. He spoke to the public
contention regarding the measure.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said he bristled every time he heard
the words "dark money," characterizing the term a scare tactic
without true meaning that was used to pass Ballot Measure 2.
It was clear to him, he said, that voters had "buyers' remorse"
when it came to RCV. He stated his support for Version U.
1:44:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD moved to report CSHB 4, Version 33-
LS0094\U, Klein, 1/15/24, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Carpenter, C.
Johnson, Eastman, Allard, and Vance voted in favor of reporting
CSHB 4(JUD) from committee. Representatives Groh and Gray voted
against it. Therefore, CSHB 4(JUD) was reported out of the
House Judiciary Standing Committee by a vote of 5-2.
1:45:19 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:45 p.m. to 1:49 p.m.
1:49:47 PM
CHAIR VANCE noted that the paperwork was being retrieved from
the Chief Clerk's Office.
HJR 7-CONST AM: PERMANENT FUND DIVIDEND
1:50:14 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 7, Proposing amendments to the
Constitution of the State of Alaska requiring payment of a
dividend to eligible state residents. [Before the committee was
CSHJR 7(W&M).]
1:50:48 9PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER, prime sponsor, presented CSHJR 7(W&M).
He issued the sponsor statement [included in the committee
packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
For almost thirty years, Alaskans could count on their
annual dividend checks as the state legislature
followed the law that directed the dividend to be paid
by a statutory formula.
The trust between the government and the people of
Alaska was broken in 2016 when Governor Walker vetoed
a portion of the annual dividend and the Alaska
Supreme Court ultimately determined that dividends
were subject to the annual appropriations process.
While the legislature could choose to follow the law
and appropriate the dividend according to statute and
separate it from the budget, they have not done so.
Instead, the permanent fund dividend has been
subjected to the budget process, where the dividend
competes with government spending and often becomes
the deficit reduction solution.
HJR7 requires the state to pay the annual Permanent
Fund dividend according to a formula in statute,
rather than by the whims of the annual appropriations
process.
The amendments in HJR7 address the constitutional
issues raised by the Supreme Court in its Wielechowski
opinion that allowed the legislature to appropriate
the annual dividend rather than pay it out by formula.
Neglecting to constitutionalize the PFD would permit
lawmakers to continue avoiding their obligation to
address the shortcomings of Alaska's fiscal and
economic planning, placing the Permanent Fund at risk.
Constitutionally enshrining the Permanent Fund
Dividend will provide for the maximum benefit of all
Alaskans and ensure the prosperity of the Permanent
Fund for generations of Alaskans to come.
1:56:05 PM
KENDRA BROUSSARD, Staff, Representative Ben Carpenter, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime
sponsor, presented the sectional analysis for CSHJR 7(W&M)
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Section 1
Article IX, section 7 of the Constitution of Alaska is
amended to except the payment of Permanent Fund
dividends from the prohibition of dedication of funds.
Section 2
Article IX, section 13 of the Constitution of Alaska
is amended to except the payment of Permanent Fund
dividends from the requirement to appropriate all
funds that are paid out of the state treasury.
Section 4
Article IX, Section 15 of the Constitution of Alaska
is amended to require the state to pay a permanent
fund dividend according to a formula in law.
Section 5
Article XV of the Constitution is amended to add a new
transition section that would make the constitutional
changes effective for fiscal year 2026.
Section 6
Provides that this amendment to the Constitution be
placed before voters at the next general election.
1:57:25 PM
MS. BROUSSARD directed attention to a PowerPoint presentation,
titled "Permanent Fund Dividend" [hard copy included in the
committee packet]. She summarized several of the slides,
including slide 2, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Alaska Constitution Article IX, Section 7
The proceeds of any state tax or license shall not be
dedicated to any special purpose, except as provided
in section 15 of this article or when required by the
federal government for state participation in federal
programs. 1976
Alaska Constitution IX, Section 15
At least twenty-five per cent of all mineral lease
rentals, royalties, royalty sale proceeds, federal
mineral revenue sharing payments and bonuses received
by the State shall be placed in a permanent fund, the
principal of which shall be used only for those
income-producing investments specifically designated
by law as eligible for permanent fund investments. All
income from the permanent fund shall be deposited in
the general fund unless otherwise provided by law.
1976
MS. BROUSSARD continued to slide 3, which featured a statement
from Governor Jay Hammond regarding his intent for the permanent
fund dividend (PFD) in 1976. Slide 4 highlighted a statement by
the House Finance Committee in 1982 pertaining to the payment of
the dividend. She advanced to slide 7, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Governor Walker proposed several revisions to
permanent fund formulas that would have allowed for
use of earnings, as well as a variety of new revenue
measures. After the 2016 session, when none of these
had passed and the state was facing continuing large
deficits, he vetoed roughly half of the PFD
appropriation in the FY 2017 budget. This was
historic, the first time since 1982 that the dividend
formula had not been followed. His stated intent at
the time was to draw attention to the seriousness of
Alaska's fiscal crisis. Subsequently, the legislature
followed this precedent and appropriated less than the
statutory formula during the 2017 and 2018 sessions.
MS. BROUSSARD noted the creation of the Bicameral Permanent Fund
Working Group in January 2020 to find a solution to the PFD on
slide 20. In June 2021, the Fiscal Policy Working Group (FPWG)
was formed, which recommended enshrining the dividend in the
Alaska Constitution.
1:59:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER explained that that the FPWG offered
two recommendations: constitutionalizing the PFD formula itself
or constitutionalizing the dividend while allowing statute to
dictate the formula. CSHJR 7(W&M) would require the state to
pay the annual PFD according to a formula in statute, rather
than constitutionalizing the size of the dividend. He posited
that in doing so, the legislation would effectively enact an
appropriation limit because the statutory formula would be
"backed up" by the constitution.
2:01:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked the sponsor to elaborate on how the
resolution would effectuate a spending cap.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER explained that CSHJR 7(W&M) would not
solve the size of the dividend; however, it would require that a
dividend is paid.
2:03:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether the expectation was for the
legislature to revisit the formula each year to match available
funds.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER suggested that if CSHJR 7(W&M) were to
pass, a conversation about the size of the dividend would need
to be held in a policy committee prior to the budget process.
He advocated for establishing a system of consistency and
predictability that was part of a larger fiscal plan to avoid
annual discussions on the size of the PFD. He reiterated that
the resolution would force a conversation about a larger fiscal
plan and force a decision on the statutory size of the dividend.
Other fiscal mechanisms could be put in place to stabilize the
state's finances.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN conveyed a historic concern about the
legislature spending from the Alaska Permanent Fund itself. He
questioned whether the proposed legislation would enable the
legislature to spend from the corpus of the fund and how, going
forward, the earnings reserve account (ERA) could be spent.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER clarified that the ERA was accessible
to the legislature by a simple 21 vote majority. He added that
nothing in the legislation would give the legislature more
access to the corpus of the fund. CSHJR 7(W&M) would simply
state that a PFD would be distributed going forward and that the
size of the dividend would be decided upon by the legislature.
He asked Ms. Nauman whether the corpus of the fund could be
spent if there was not enough money in the ERA to make the 5
percent of market value (POMV) draw and whether the resolution
would change that.
2:16:05 PM
EMILY NAUMAN, Director, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency (LAA), answered no, the legislature could not
withdraw money from the corpus of the Alaska Permanent Fund, per
Article 4, Section 15 of the Alaska Constitution. CSHJR 7(W&M)
would not change that general structure. Instead, the
resolution would allow the legislature to set a formula through
which money from the ERA was deposited into the general fund
(GF) and directs the state to pay a dividend from the GF based
on a statutory formula.
CHAIR VANCE questioned the impact of passing CSHJR 7(W&M)
without changing the current statutory formula. In addition,
she asked whether the legislation would legally obligate the
legislature to clarify its statutes.
MS. NAUMAN said nothing in CSHJR 7(W&M) would require the
legislature to amend current statutes.
CHAIR VANCE asked Mr. Painter whether passage of the resolution
would require the legislature to change [the current statutory
formula].
2:19:35 PM
ALEXEI PAINTER, Director, Legislative Finance Division (LFD),
Legislative Agencies and Offices, said no, statutes would not
need to be changed from a fiscal note standpoint. For the sake
of conformity, however, the mechanics may need to be clarified.
He noted that with the current statutory formula, the state
would be left with a fiscal deficit.
REPRESENTATIVE GROH asked whether Representative Carpenter
recalled the FPWG recommendation that urged the legislature to
negotiate a comprehensive solution as a whole, rather than one
part at a time. Further, he asked how that recommendation
aligned with the singular focus of CSHJR 7(W&M).
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER explained that Alaska's single subject
requirement prevents a comprehensive package from being drafted
in one omnibus bill. He reflected on his "good faith effort" to
sponsor multiple bills last session to meet numerous FPWG
recommendations. He opined that the proposed legislation was a
good starting point to "overcome the inertia to do nothing."
REPRESENTATIVE GROH asked whether adopting the resolution would
create a hole by reducing the possibility of agreement on a
comprehensive solution.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER disagreed. He shared his belief that
passing CSHJR 7(W&M) and thereby ensuring that a dividend be
paid would force continued conversations.
2:29:28 PM
CHAIR VANCE asked the bill sponsor to explain the mechanics of
passing a constitutional amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER explained that passage of CSHJR 7(W&M)
would require a vote of the people, as the legislature could not
amend the constitution without voter approval.
CHAIR VANCE questioned the threshold for passing a
constitutional amendment in the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER answered two-thirds of each body.
CHAIR VANCE questioned the other components of the
[comprehensive] fiscal plan.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER listed the following components:
addressing the PFD, stabilizing revenue sources, implementing a
spending limit, and reducing the size of government.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether this constitutional amendment would
stimulate economic growth and fiscal stability in Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said on its own, CSHJR 7(W&M) would not
directly impact the economy. However, the current statutory
formula, which provided for a 50/50 split between the dividend
and government spending, would have a sizeable impact on
Alaskans.
2:35:57 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that CSHJR 7(W&M) would be held over.
2:36:50 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:36 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 129 - Amendment #1 (B.7)(as conceptually amended) by Chair Vance.pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 129 |
| HB 129 - Amendment #6 (B.9)(as conceptually amended).pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 129 |
| HB 4 - Summary of Changes (01-17-24).pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 4 |
| HB 4 - v.U (01-15-24).pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 4 |
| HJR 7 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 7 |
| HJR 7 - v.B.PDF |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 7 |
| HJR 7 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 7 |
| HJR 7 - Div. of Elections Fiscal Note.pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 7 |
| HJR 7 Presenatation - Permanent Fund Dividend.pdf |
HJUD 1/17/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 7 |