Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/06/1995 12:01 PM Senate RLS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE
April 6, 1995
12:01 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Mike Miller, Chair
Senator Bert Sharp
Senator Judy Salo
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Drue Pearce, Vice Chair
Senator Jim Duncan
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 146(L&C) am
"An Act relating to an Iditarod mushing sweepstakes."
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
HB 146 - Finance report 3/28/95.
Rules minutes dated 4/5/95.
WITNESS REGISTER
Teresa Sager
State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered information on SCS CSHB 146(RLS)
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-5, SIDE A
CHAIRMAN MILLER called the Senate Rules Committee meeting to order
at 12:01 p.m. He brought CSHB 146(L&C) am (SLED DOG RACE CLASSIC)
back before the committee and directed attention to a proposed SCS
CSHB 146(RLS).
TERESA SAGER, staff to Chairman Miller, explained that Legal
Services brought to the committee's attention a problem with the
last page of SCS CSHB 146(FIN). Page 3 defines "mushing
sweepstakes" to mean to a game of chance where a prize of money is
awarded for the closest guess or guesses of at least three elements
of uncertainty about the Iditarod sled dog race that cannot be
determined prior to the commencement of the race, etc. The drafter
indicated that on line 2 of page 3 naming the Iditarod as part of
the definition of "mushing sweepstakes" creates a local and special
legislation problem, and he has recommended that "the Iditarod" on
line 2 be deleted and replaced with the word "a." That change is
the only difference between the Rules SCS and the Finance SCS. Ms.
Sager added that the legislation still limits what races or what
entities may participate in a mushing sweepstakes, but this is not
the same kind of problem.
SENATOR SHARP noted that "Iditarod" is maintained throughout that
paragraph except for that one area. MS. SAGER agreed and pointed
out that in his memo the drafter stated that while it is his
opinion that limiting the application of a general law, locally or
specially, is no less violative of the prohibition on local or
special acts in the Constitution, starting with a general law and
then limiting its application at least provides an argument that
the legislature has attempted to abide with the constitutional
requirements in this regard.
There being no further testimony on the Rules SCS, CHAIRMAN MILLER
asked for the will of the committee.
SENATOR SHARP moved that SCS CSHB 146(RLS) be adopted. Hearing no
objection, the Chairman stated the motion carried.
SENATOR SHARP moved SCS CSHB 146(RLS) be approved for calendaring.
Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.
There being no further business to come before the committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 12:07 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|