Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/16/1994 08:00 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 16, 1994
8:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Al Vezey, Chairman
Representative Gary Davis
Representative Harley Olberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Pete Kott, Vice-Chairman
Representative Bettye Davis
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Fran Ulmer
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
*HJR 53: Proposing amendments to the Constitution of
the State of Alaska relating to the length of
a regular session and establishing a
unicameral legislature; and providing for an
effective date for each amendment.
MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE WITH NO
RECOMMENDATIONS
HJR 51: Requesting the governor to file suit in the
United States Supreme Court against the
United States government alleging violations
of the civil rights of Americans listed as
prisoners of war or missing in action in
Southeast Asia; and requesting the other
states to join in this suit.
HELD IN COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE NAVARRE
Alaska State Legislature
Alaska State Capitol, Room 521
Juneau, AK 99811-0460
Phone: 465-3779
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-sponsor of HJR 53
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES
Alaska State Legislature
Alaska State Capitol, Room 501
Juneau, AK 99811-0460
Phone: 465-3743
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HJR 53 and Sponsor of
HJR 51
JEFF LOGAN, Staff
Representative Joe Green
Alaska State Capitol, Room 114
Juneau, AK 99811-0460
Phone: 465-4931
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HJR 53
GORDON HARRISON, Director
Legislative Research Agency
130 Seward St., Suite 218
Juneau, AK 99801-2196
Phone: 465-3991
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HJR 53
TIM ARMSTRONG, Commander
American Legion, Auke Bay Post 25
6590 Glacier Hwy. #101
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: Not given.
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 51
NANCY GOURLEY
1802 Forest Ave.
Kenai, AK 99611
Phone: 283-2208
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 51
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HJR 53
SHORT TITLE: UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE/SESSION LIMIT
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)GREEN,Navarre,Brown,
Bunde,Mulder,Hudson,Sitton
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/04/94 2255 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/04/94 2255 (H) STATE AFFAIRS,JUDICIARY,FINANCE
04/16/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: HJR 51
SHORT TITLE: SUIT RE POWS & MIAS AGAINST U.S. & OTHERS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES, Therriault,
Martin,Mulder,Hudson
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/19/94 2108 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/19/94 2109 (H) MLV, STATE AFFAIRS
02/09/94 2327 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MARTIN, MULDER
02/10/94 (H) MLV AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 17
02/10/94 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
02/22/94 2474 (H) MLV RPT CS(MLV) 3DP 1NR
02/22/94 2475 (H) DP: MULDER, KOTT, FOSTER
02/22/94 2475 (H) NR: NAVARRE
02/22/94 2475 (H) -INDETERMINATE FISCAL NOTE
(LAW) 2/22/94
02/22/94 2475 (H) REFERRED TO STATE AFFAIRS
02/22/94 2484 (H) FIN REFERRAL ADDED
03/28/94 3028 (H) COSPONSOR(S): HUDSON
04/16/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 94-48, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIRMAN AL VEZEY called the meeting to order at 8:02 a.m.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS was present. The meeting is on
teleconference with Anchorage, Fairbanks and Kenai/Soldotna.
HJR 53 - UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE/SESSION LIMIT
CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened HJR 53 for discussion. He noted
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG's arrival.
(REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG joined the meeting at 8:03 a.m.)
Number 022
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE NAVARRE, CO-SPONSOR, addressed HJR 53
for REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, SPONSOR. He said
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN was out of town. He stated in
reference to the bicameral system, when the United States
set up its system, there was a compromise between big and
small states over population areas versus geographic areas.
The compromise was that each state would get two senators
and a number of representatives based on their population.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE related to the creation of Alaska's
system and how a unicameral system was considered. Being a
new state, however, and questioning how they would even fund
government, they were afraid they would not be able to
justify to Congress a different system than most other
states. Therefore, a bicameral system was chosen. Alaska
allots geographic representation in the Senate, and
population representation in the House. He believed the
U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1966 that states could not
allocate their legislatures on the basis on geographic
representation, it had to be one man - one vote. As a
result, Alaska now has two bodies that represent exactly the
same population basis with half as many people. He felt the
checks and balances of this system would develop without
question in the unicameral system.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE stated the unicameral system would
simplify the legislative process, make it more
understandable for the public, eliminate duplication, cause
less bills to be introduced, reducing research, and enhance
accountability of the legislature. He felt under the
unicameral system the problem with the concentrated powers
of committee chairman and others, could be reweighed. He
suggested checks and balances between the committees, rather
than between the houses. He expected a different structure
of rules to accommodate the different changes.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE commented a unicameral system might
reduce the influence of lobbyists because the concentrated
power of only a few people from both sides would lessen.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE stated HJR 53 reduces the number of
legislators to 49. He and REPRESENTATIVE GREEN decided
because Alaska was the 49th state, 49 legislators would have
some significant historical value. HJR 53 would make the
change to a unicameral system after the next census. They
felt debate would be needed before the change and it would
not threaten anyone already in the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE commented even though the two bodies
of the bicameral legislature are meant to provide a more
thorough review of proposed legislation, in the end, the
scrutiny tends to falter. He noted legislation based on
strong emotionalism from a certain incident, can be stopped
in a bicameral system because of its slow process. Whereas,
it might have rushed through a unicameral system without
being considered adequately.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE referred to Nebraska, the only state
with a unicameral system, which through a study, he found
they consider their legislature to be the most accountable
to the public in the country.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE noted a considerable amount of money
would be saved because of the reduction in the amount of
legislators. He estimated in excess of $2 million a year.
Number 220
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE to explain the
savings.
Number 222
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE answered $2 million a year based on
salaries of 11 less legislators and their respective
commensurate staff.
Number 227
CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented the average cost of everything
involved with a legislator is about $600,000.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE replied there would be 11 less
legislators.
Number 234
REPRESENTATIVE HARLEY OLBERG directed CHAIRMAN VEZEY to page
2 of the fiscal note for a detailed description. He noted
it lists 11 less legislators, 22 less staff, travel,
contractual supplies, equipment, etc., to comprise the $2
million figure.
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG found it interesting in the historical
record, that in 1975 a bill was introduced with 20 co-
sponsors that authorized an advisory vote. The bill passed
the House within days and was sent to the Senate "where it
died in the State Affairs committee."
Number 260
CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented he felt the overhead expenses had
not been taken into account. He assumed less legislative
agency personnel, research or legal, would be needed. He
estimated a 20 percent cut of the legislature's current
operating budget at $6 million.
Number 280
REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS questioned if other states had
attempted to convert to the unicameral system.
Number 282
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE answered he had not studied the
material for some time, but he guessed other states consider
the change based on frustration with the bicameral system.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE mentioned HJR 53 also limits the
session to 90 days. They felt this would be adequate.
Number 296
CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented 90 days would probably be adequate
for a bicameral legislature, too. He felt people want their
own personal representative in the legislature. They do not
want to share with everyone. He stated if anything were to
change in the legislature it would be an increase in the
degree of representation. This is offset by the demand for
keeping the cost of government down. He estimated
approximately 11,000 people per representative, with a
switch to the unicameral system. He inquired if there was
another rationale for the degree of representation 49
representatives would offer.
Number 331
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE responded when he had introduced this
type of legislation in the past, he had set the number of
legislators at 55 so current legislators would not feel
threatened. He said 49 was picked because Alaska is the
49th state. He said 49 districts instead of the current 40
districts, would make the districts smaller. Without the
duplication, people would actually have more representation.
Number 345
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated the biggest demand for greater
representation comes from the bush areas. He gave the
example of one district which is almost the size of Texas,
with barely 13,000 people in it. Reducing it to 11,000, it
would still be "as large as Texas, less the panhandle." He
felt the concerns of the rural areas with smaller districts
would not be addressed. He inquired if this degree of
higher representation is not reasonable to address by the
legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE replied it might be worthwhile to ask
legislative research to gather numbers as to how to address
this concern. Where are the population centers and what is
the optimal size of representative districts, thereby
reducing the size of the rural districts.
Number 376
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated legislative research could not give
the answer. The area most extreme are the Interior villages
with very low population densities. Coastal communities
have a little more concentration. He questioned if the
reduction to 11,000 people in a district would be enough of
a difference.
Number 397
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG suggested using a pie shape, centering
in Anchorage, whereby every district would be pie shaped.
This would work if urban and rural had a similar vested
interest.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded that is not allowed under the
Alaska Constitution.
Number 407
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE added the different rural groups all
want their own representatives; however, due to federal law
another group's influence cannot be reduced or impacted. He
suggested there might be a way to determine the interests of
the groups, thereby determining optimal size.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated he did not believe there was a
political solution to the problem. As a microcosm, there is
tremendous strife and tension between different rural
groups. The groups do not want to be dominated by one
another. An ethnicity break down would diminish the
populations to 4,000-6,000 people.
Number 432
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES commented on HJR 53. She was
concerned that even though the unicameral system may alter
the public's view of the legislative process, there would
still be no way to totally get rid of the politics. The
problem lies in the politics. She agreed the unicameral
system needs to be studied. She felt there is time for
legislators to review material before it goes to the floor;
however, a lot of legislation has passed without their
sufficient review. She stated if the lobbyists were made
less effective, the public would then have to be more vocal.
There would be more time spent on teleconferences, thereby
slowing down the committee process. There would be benefits
with a unicameral system; however, additional changes would
have to be made in the processes.
Number 460
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE agreed. He commented that lobbyists
would still have a tremendous amount of influence. The
legislature knows that a lot of times the lobbyists have the
best information available on the individual issues because
they have a vested interest in them. He felt their
influence would diminish because they would not have the
opportunity, as they do now on both sides, to stop a piece
of legislation with a relatively few number of people. The
overwhelming majority of the legislative body can be
thwarted simply by having the right person in the right
place.
Number 476
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated the lobbyists represent a lot of
people who, without lobbyists, would have to fragmentally
make their presentation.
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE commented Gordon Harrison, who
researched the unicameral system for him over a period of
years, has written a book on the Constitution of the state
of Alaska. He noted he was present to testify and would be
a valuable resource.
Number 489
JEFF LOGAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, commented on
HJR 53 for the sponsor. He stated REPRESENTATIVE GREEN had
a prior engagement out of town which prevented him from
being present. He addressed the question about the number
of legislators, and stated that REPRESENTATIVE GREEN was
flexible and was willing to change it. He agreed HJR 53 was
deserving of more research as REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated.
He commented there has been considerable research done on
the unicameral system in Alaska over the last 50 years.
Number 507
CHAIRMAN VEZEY estimated about 25 percent of Alaska's
population is legally classified as a legal minority. He
felt the federal government treats Alaska "as a second class
state" because of the large population of racial diversity.
Alaska's representation or voting laws cannot be changed
without approval of the U.S. Justice Department. He assured
the committee the change to a unicameral system would be
subject to federal challenge. Alaska would have to prove it
was not diminishing the representation of its ethnic and
racial minorities.
Number 518
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE responded CHAIRMAN VEZEY may be
right. He suspected a legal battle would ensue because the
government in the state is done to the purview of the state,
under the States' Rights Act. Approval by the Justice
Department would be in the apportionment process within the
structure, rather than challenging the system. He felt
Alaska would have a very strong case.
Number 526
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES directed to the point about researching
the unicameral system. She noted there may be some
legislators well educated in the unicameral system, however,
some are not. For the rest of the legislature to "buy in"
to the idea and be educated about the unicameral system it
would take time. She noted more time than what is left in
this session.
Number 535
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded he believed everyone in the House
was very much aware of the concept of representation and the
duplicity of the bicameral system. He felt the legislature
was capable of making a knowledgeable decision on this
subject.
Number 549
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE commented the public is very informed
about the unicameral system because all of the local
governments (e.g., school boards, etc.,) operate as
unicameral systems.
Number 555
GORDON HARRISON, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AGENCY,
commented on the HJR 53. He felt the unicameral system
would be a sensible change for Alaska. From the public's
perspective the process would be less frustrating and easier
to understand. The unicameral system would make it more
difficult for lobbyists to affect one committee chairman,
thereby stopping a bill.
MR. HARRISON addressed representation. As strategy and
policy, it may be desirable to have 60 members in a
unicameral legislature. The senators would therefore not
lose their opportunity to serve in the legislature.
Dividing the state more with 60 districts would put the
representatives closer to their people. He mentioned
campaigning would be more manageable for those in rural
districts. The numerical representation of various groups
would not be affected, thereby not having any more
influence. However, their representatives would be closer
to them because the huge districts would be divided into
smaller districts. He felt rural people should find the
unicameral system very appealing.
MR. HARRISON stated he believed if 60 people were divided
into various committees, more people would have a longer
amount of time to focus and work on a bill. Presently, the
20 members of the Senate are sparsely divided among the
committees, therefore working quickly from meeting to
meeting. A unicameral house would increase the amount of
time committed to committee work.
MR. HARRISON addressed the checks and balances. The
legislative branch is the only branch of government with
internal checks and balances within itself. He stated the
bicameral system was designed to cripple the legislature.
People are suspicious of law making power, and checks and
balances enhance the ability to slow down the process. He
noted the unicameral system does not eliminate the inherent
checks and balances between branches of government, rather
the check within the legislative branch.
MR. HARRISON noted unicameral systems are throughout
municipal government and they do function efficiently. The
unicameral system is considered a radical reform because it
is not traditional. He stated a unicameral proposal has
been before virtually every state. Some of which, he noted,
have come very close to being adopted. Only Nebraska
succeeded in the depression. He conveyed no one in Nebraska
has any regrets about their unicameral system.
Number 641
CHAIRMAN VEZEY referred to the history of politics before
1964, and stated the purpose of the reapportionment and
bicameral legislature is to prevent, to the greatest extent
possible, change. He said Alaska's Senate was set up to be
there in perpetuity. No allowance for change in the Alaska
Constitution.
MR. HARRISON responded those intentions have been radically
upset by the reapportionment decisions, for example Baker v.
Carr. These decisions required Senate, or upper chambers,
to be apportioned on the basis on population rather than
geographical area. The initial state Constitution, set up
with the Senate representing geographical areas, has been
fundamentally changed by outlawing the apportionment of one
house on the basis of geography.
Number 672
CHAIRMAN VEZEY reiterated the state Constitution states
there will be no apportionment changes in the Senate.
Changes in the House are only allowed when there is 100
percent disparity in population. He stated "one man - one
vote" is accepted quite readily by Alaskans.
MR. HARRISON agreed.
Number 680
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE commented, as an example, the
legislature used to have two research agencies and now there
is only one.
Number 685
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS noted one of his biggest concerns
was seeing the duplication of presentations before
committees for a few months out of the year.
Number 692
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG mentioned limiting agency lobbying.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded it is ironic that state law
specifically excludes public employees from regulation of
lobbying.
TAPE 94-48, SIDE B
Number 018
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES commented the legislature could demand
the finance committee only deal with finance issues instead
of rewriting bills.
Number 025
REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE responded often times legislation
given to the finance committee has not been sufficiently
altered to the state where it is in its final form. Other
committees often do not do their work.
Number 034
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG related to Nebraska and how they went
to a unicameral legislature in the depression. He felt
Alaska had a wonderful opportunity coming.
Number 040
MR. HARRISON added the depression was part of the
motivation. The state government was broke and the long
unproductive sessions had frustrated the people.
Number 072
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG moved to pass HJR 53 from committee
with individual recommendations.
Number 075
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, moved HJR 53 from
committee with individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a recess at 8:25 a.m. The meeting
reconvened at 9:03.
HJR 51 - SUIT RE POWS & MIAS AGAINST U.S. & OTHERS
CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened HJR 51 for discussion.
Number 094
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES, SPONSOR OF HJR 51, gave a
brief statement. She noted her sponsor statement was in the
packet, therefore she would state her concern and purpose
for filing HJR 51. She said the dissention of POWs and MIAs
has been ongoing, and she believed most people will agree
that it had never been satisfactorily concluded. Any
lawsuits regarding MIAs or POWs have not been successful
because the only way to get standing in the court would be
for the MIA or POW to be present. She noted if they were
there, however, there would be no case.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES mentioned a representative from
Michigan has determined there is a possibility for the
states to file suit against the federal government in a
Supreme Court. The states would have standing in
representing the people in their residence. Therefore, HJR
51 came by way of Michigan, which they passed. If there is
sufficient participation by the states, a joint suit could
be filed against the government to resolve the situation
with the POWs and the MIAs.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated the information in HJR 51 is
correct. She noted a disturbance she has with the fiscal
note. She believed it presently has a zero fiscal note;
however, there is a note stating if a suit was filed
attorney fees would be associated. She understood a suit
would not be filed by the state, but the state would
participate in a suit by the other states over the POWs and
MIAs. She felt the people that served the country well in
the military deserve the attention to bring the
disappearance of people to some successful conclusion.
Number 167
TIM ARMSTRONG, COMMANDER, AMERICAN LEGION, AUKE BAY POST 25,
supported HJR 51. He also unofficially represented the
members of the Disabled American Veterans, Military Order of
the Purple Heart, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars. He
applauded the effort made by REPRESENTATIVE JAMES. A number
of individuals, being Vietnam, Korean, and World War II
veterans, felt there has never been a true accounting of the
POWs. They support HJR 51.
Number 191
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked who Thomas E. Anderson, U.S. Marine
Corp, and Howard M. Koslosky, U.S. Navy, were. (page 2,
line 26)
MR. ARMSTRONG answered he was unfamiliar with them on an
individual basis; however, they are the two Alaskans
unaccounted for. They spawned the interest for HJR 51.
Number 205
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified they are the two official Alaskan
MIAs.
MR. ARMSTRONG affirmed CHAIRMAN VEZEY. As veterans, they
feel suppressed by the fact that the U.S. government has not
pursued the issue adequately. He noted Gerald Coffee, who
was a Navy pilot shot down in 1966 and held as a captive in
the "Hanoi Hilton" and released in 1973, spoke as a POW that
there were more prisoners that have been held in Vietnam, as
well as in Russia. They conclude prisoners have been and
might still be held, therefore they seek an accounting of
those prisoners. He noted those people who feel this
process might be too expensive probably were not involved or
related to those MIAs or POWs who remain unaccounted for.
Number 245
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS inquired if there was not a U.S.
defense policy that after each war there is an accounting.
He referred to HJR 51, beginning on page 1, line 9 which
states the "United States government position is that all of
these POWs have been returned,..." Who has made the
determination.
Number 258
MR. ARMSTRONG responded "there was a Senator Karey who made
it,...based on the premise that the U.S. government was
unwilling to spend much more money attempting to locate any
more of these POWs... We thought of it as an embarrassment
to the country, because we are unaware as to why these
prisoners are being held."
Number 267
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS clarified that it was a congressman,
as opposed to a person in the Defense Department.
Number 290
CHAIRMAN VEZEY moved to the Kenai teleconference site.
Number 292
NANCY GOURLEY testified via teleconference in support of HJR
51. She stated her brother was lost in Vietnam on February
18, 1971. They have been trying for several years to
account for the loss of her brother. She stated the Senate
Select Committee during the tenure have concluded men were
alive at the end of the war and did not return. She wanted
to know what happened to those men that were left, and those
missing, however, declared killed. Her family has dedicated
an enormous amount of time and financial resources to answer
these questions. She urged support of HJR 51. She stated
her family has been lied to, deceived and misled by higher
agencies within the government. Her brother's crash sight
was excavated in February 1991. Only a single tooth was
recovered out of the entire human remains. He was buried
based on the recovery of a single tooth at the family's
opposition. The family finds this tragic. Her brother was
lost in Laos and of 588 lost there, not one was returned.
Number 355
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS stated he understood she had made
extensive attempts to get actual details of what happened to
her brother. He noted HJR 51 states the government has
ceased investigations for those who may still be there. He
asked if HJR 51 was the only way to get the government to do
a proper investigation and report back to the families of
those lost.
Number 372
MS. GOURLEY affirmed REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS. She stated
they have gone to Congress, done demonstrations, and they
have two nationally recognized organizations comprised of
family members. She felt there is nothing more they can do.
Number 393
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS repeated page 1, lines 9-11, and
said this would indicate to him there is no one in the U.S.
government making any attempts to identify or return any
POWs that may be lost.
MS. GOURLEY agreed. Veterans organizations and the American
Legion. She mentioned across the country there is the
National Vietnam Veterans Coalition, Bravo, Homecoming 2,
etc...
Number 411
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated based on a letter from the
American Legion, there are some suggested amendments to the
language. She submitted the changes as an amendment to HJR
51(MLV).
Number 422
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS asked if the committee had adopted
anything.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered no. He said the matter officially
before the committee was HJR 51.
Number 425
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to adopt CSHJR 51(MLV).
Number 428
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted CSHJR 51(MLV).
Number 429
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated first change the language on
page 1, line 9, to read "WHEREAS the [implied] United States
government position [is] that all..." This change would say
the same thing without being so demanding.
Number 437
CHAIRMAN VEZEY questioned if the U.S. government has taken
an official position as to the disposition of the POWs and
MIAs.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES answered she did not have any evidence
to provide they have. Therefore, less demanding language
would do the same thing.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated on page 1, line 12, the
general's name should be "Kwang," not "Kwong."
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated on page 2, beginning on line 5,
it should state,"...yet individuals [within] the federal
intelligence agencies have tried to discredit..." The less
demanding wording would be more effective and actual.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES referred to page 2, line 16, which
would be changed to read,"...may still be held in Southeast
Asia and is not actively searching for remaining
Americans;..." This would be better language than saying
the are "obstructing the search."
Number 458
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated the WHEREAS, beginning line 15, causes
him concern because he was under the impression the
government had a contingency of American military in
Southeast Asia engaging in sight searches currently.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES replied she was not aware of it.
Number 468
MS. GOURLEY interjected there are some crash sight
investigations going on, however, they do not have anything
underway for those lost.
Number 478
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked if there was a motion to adopt the
proposed amendments to CSHJR 51(MLV).
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG so moved.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted the
amendments. He noted a committee substitute would have to
be drawn up, therefore CSHJR 51(STA) would be brought back
up at Monday's meeting.
Number 487
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES thanked the men from the veterans
organization who were present at the meeting in support of
CSHJR 51.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no more business before the
committee, adjourned the meeting at 9:30 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|