Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/06/2004 02:05 PM House MLV
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AND
VETERANS' AFFAIRS
April 6, 2004
2:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Nick Stepovich, Chair
Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 536
"An Act relating to applications for permanent fund dividends by
certain individuals serving in the armed forces; and providing
for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 536(MLV) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 536
SHORT TITLE: PFUND APPLICATION DEADLINES FOR MILITARY
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF ECON DEV, INT TRADE & TOURISM
03/15/04 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/15/04 (H) MLV, STA
04/06/04 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE CHERYLL HEINZE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the chair of the House Special
Committee on Economic Development, International Trade and
Tourism, which requested introduction of HB 536.
JOHN BITTNER, Staff
to Representative Cheryll Heinze
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 536, answered
questions.
SHARON BARTON, Director
Permanent Fund Dividend Division
Department of Revenue
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 536, answered
questions.
VERN RAUCHENSTEIN
Talkeetna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testifying as the father of Christopher
Rauchenstein, related his son's situation, which was the impetus
for HB 536.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 04-4, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR NICK STEPOVICH called the House Special Committee on
Military and Veterans' Affairs meeting to order at 2:05 p.m.
Representatives Stepovich, Masek, Dahlstrom, Lynn, Cissna, and
Gruenberg were present at the call to order.
HB 536-PFUND APPLICATION DEADLINES FOR MILITARY
CHAIR STEPOVICH announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 536, "An Act relating to applications for
permanent fund dividends by certain individuals serving in the
armed forces; and providing for an effective date."
Number 0111
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved to adopt CSHB 536, Version 23-
LS1796\B, Cook, 4/6/04, as the working document. There being no
objection, Version B was before the committee.
Number 0171
REPRESENTATIVE CHERYLL HEINZE, Alaska State Legislature, spoke
as the chair of the House Special Committee on Economic
Development, International Trade and Tourism, which requested
the legislation of the House Rules Standing Committee, explained
that HB 536 was drafted in response to letters and calls that
she received from some of the brave men and women who were
serving in the recent wars of Afghanistan and Iraq. Due to the
unpredictable nature of communications in a war zone, some of
the men and women serving in the armed forces overseas weren't
able to file their permanent fund dividend (PFD) application.
Therefore, those applicants were denied. Representative Heinze
said, "They should not be punished for doing their duty [for]
their country." This legislation addresses the problem by
providing members of the armed services 90 days after the
individual is out of harms way to apply for the permanent fund
dividend. The legislation also applies retroactively to members
of the armed services who served in 2003 and 2004. If members
of the armed services who served in 2003 and 2004 were eligible
for hostile fire or imminent danger pay during the application
period for either year, those individuals will have 90 days
after passage of HB 536 to apply for those dividends. She
concluded, "All of us as Alaskans and Americans owe a debt of
gratitude to the brave and selfless men and women who work day
and night to ensure that our great nation stays great and free."
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE said this legislation "comes from the
heart." She informed the committee that there is a family in
Talkeetna, which consists of eight children. One of the
children, Christopher Rauchenstein, became the first Marine to
march into Baghdad. Christopher's PFD application didn't arrive
before he was sent to war, and therefore he was denied his PFD.
Representative Heinze opined that such is a travesty. Although
the director of the Permanent Fund Dividend Division agreed, she
pointed out that the change has to be made in statute.
Therefore, this lead to approaching the military to obtain a
definition of "war", which proved to be difficult. However, it
became apparent that those who are eligible for hostile fire,
imminent danger pay are the individuals for whom this would
apply. Representative Heinze closed by asking for the
committee's support.
Number 0540
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recalled his time in Vietnam on a cargo
ship when he was in and out of the war zone. He pointed out
that he wasn't sure how being in and out of the war zone, but
deployed would play out for the final sentences on page 1.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN recalled his time in Vietnam when, after so
many hours in a combat zone, the individual received combat for
that month.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to the number of individuals
or situations this legislation would address.
Number 0888
JOHN BITTNER, Staff to Representative Cheryll Heinze, Alaska
State Legislature, answered that the number of permanent funds
that would be issued under this legislation isn't going to be
considered a very significant number. With regard to who
receives hostile fire, imminent danger pay, it's a specific
definition that says that those in danger of being fired upon or
being hurt by land mines and the like will receive [combat] pay.
The aforementioned seems to cover those in war zones with no
access to communication.
CHAIR STEPOVICH inquired as to what would happen if there was a
massive deployment, such as an entire division being deployed to
war.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that there might be a
situation similar to World War I or World War II in which it
could apply to almost everyone. The question is who happens to
be in a war zone during the right date.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN highlighted that those falling under this
proposed legislation would be Alaskans who are eligible for the
permanent fund if not in the military. Therefore, this
legislation wouldn't change the number of people receiving PFDs,
rather it changes when the individual may apply.
Number 1124
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM commented that this is good
legislation, and it is similar to HB 287. However, HB 287
refers to "in a time of national military emergency" versus the
language of HB 536, which refers to "by certain individuals
serving in the armed services". Representative Dahlstrom noted
that many active duty military on U.S. soil aren't in a war
zone, but may or may not be able to leave their post. She asked
if the aforementioned was considered.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE replied yes. This legislation merely
allows those in a war zone who can't obtain their PFD
application to do so and retroactively [for those in a war zone
in 2003 and 2004]. She said she didn't know how the military
would view the situation described by Representative Dahlstrom.
MR. BITTNER explained that the legislation was drafted in order
to respond to situations involving a lack of communications
ability.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE informed the committee that she talked
with Christopher Rauchenstein's commanding officers and followed
his entire route to determine whether he could obtain a computer
during that time. It was definitely a war zone in which the
main priorities were water and shelter.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that there may be some
people who are in covert operations with circumstances as
equally difficult as those in the war zone experience who can't
physically [submit his or her PFD application]. The difficulty
is in the drafting on page 1.
CHAIR STEPOVICH agreed that there could be different scenarios,
and this legislation addresses one scenario.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG turned attention to the language on the
top of page 2 of Version B. He suggested providing the
commissioner some general guidelines that could allow a waiver
of the application date. He highlighted the language on page 2,
line 9, which specifies a standard of "reasonable cause", and
said that the standard should be higher. The standard should be
"extraordinary circumstances that render it impossible for the
individual to meet the deadline and allow the commissioner to
publish regulations that define that further."
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE said that she understood what
Representative Gruenberg was doing, and had went through the
same with the definitions. Ultimately, the judge advocate
general (JAG) helped craft this legislation and the language
that addressed those who didn't apply on time.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG clarified that if the language [the
last sentence] on [the bottom] of page 1 wasn't present and only
the language on [the top] of page 2 was left, it would allow the
commissioner discretion. Representative Gruenberg specified
that it really isn't a matter of where the individual is
located, but rather whether it's impossible because of the
individual's duty. "We're seeking a causal connection between
the fact of their duty and the impossibility of meeting the
deadline," he said.
CHAIR STEPOVICH interjected his understanding that this
legislation utilizes the military criteria, and therefore he
questioned how it could be rewritten.
Number 1690
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA pointed out that those who have missed the
deadline are looking for whatever room can be found to submit
their PFD application. There is an appeals process in place.
She opined that this legislation is creating an opening for a
specific group of people who appear to have a certain level of
stress as a group. Representative Cissna expressed the need for
any changes to go through the group of people who already
address this issue in order to avoid opening an entire range of
services.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the appeals process is
within the department, so the use of the term "commissioner"
includes the appeal process.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE reiterated that the legislation uses the
military criteria. She informed the committee that there was
discussion with regard to doing this just for the war in Iraq,
but then the question becomes what about those in the war in
Afghanistan. The intent is to keep it very narrow and address
those individuals at war who can't get to a location to file,
and therefore it was tied to the military's hostile fire or
imminent danger pay.
Number 1900
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN commented that it seems folks are trying to
complicate a relatively simple piece of legislation. He related
his understanding that the legislation simply relates to when
one can apply for a PFD and ties it to the receipt of hostile
fire or imminent danger pay. Representative Lynn highlighted
that although sometimes it may not be impossible to do something
[such as submit a PFD application], it may be impractical.
Furthermore, this only applies to individuals who are eligible
to apply under the PFD criteria, regardless of the individual's
location.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE pointed out that the legislation is
retroactive to when the war started.
Number 2048
SHARON BARTON, Director, Permanent Fund Dividend Division,
Department of Revenue, surmised that the intent of the
legislation is to pick up those folks who fall within the intent
of the legislation and who may have already applied and denied.
Therefore, she suggested inserting, in Section 2, language
relating that they may apply or reapply if they have been
previously denied. The point of the language is to pick up
those folks who have already been denied, who the division
wouldn't allow to reapply without such language.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved Ms. Barton's suggestion as a friendly
amendment. There being no objection, the amendment was adopted.
MS. BARTON specified that the language would need to be inserted
on lines 17 and 19 of page 2.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK inquired as to Ms. Barton's opinion
regarding a possible language change on page 2, line 9, which
refers to reasonable cause.
MS. BARTON explained that the division would interpret
"reasonable cause" or "extraordinary circumstances" to mean that
the conditions prohibited the individual from receiving or
getting out the PFD application. Therefore, the language is
fine as written, although the language "extraordinary
circumstances" would be fine as well, she remarked.
Number 2220
VERN RAUCHENSTEIN, the father of Christopher Rauchenstein,
related his son's situation. His son, Christopher, was sent to
Iraq as the PFD deadline approached. He characterized going to
war as an extraordinary circumstance that should be considered.
CHAIR STEPOVICH remarked that Mr. Rauchenstein should be proud
of his son's service to the nation.
Number 2350
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved to report CSHB 536, Version 23-
LS1796\B, Cook, 4/6/04, [as amended] out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note.
There being no objection, CSHB 536(MLV) was reported out of the
House Special Committee on Military and Veterans' Affairs.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Military and Veterans' Affairs meeting was
adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|