Legislature(1993 - 1994)
01/25/1993 09:06 AM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
January 25, 1993
9:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Loren Leman, Chairman
Senator Mike Miller, Vice Chairman
Senator Robin Taylor
Senator Jim Duncan
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Johnny Ellis
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 6
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of
Alaska authorizing the use of the initiative to amend the
Constitution of the State of Alaska by approval of
two-thirds of the votes cast on the proposed amendment.
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
SJR 6 - No previous action to record.
WITNESS REGISTER
Senator Rick Halford
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 6.
Chip Thoma
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SJR 6.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-4, SIDE A
Number 001
Chairman Leman called the Senate State Affairs Committee
meeting to order at 9:06 a.m.
Number 016
The only order of business to come before the committee
was SJR 6 (USE OF INITIATIVE TO AMEND CONSTITUTION).
SENATOR HALFORD, sponsor of SJR 6, explained that the
resolution allows some access to the constitution by the
people. He said that Alaska's constitution is inaccessible
to the people, except for every ten years. Senator Halford
indicated that he doesn't think that the constitution should
be amendable as easily as a statute. He doesn't believe
there should be constitutional debate on every divisive
issue that people want to argue about and get enough votes
to place it on the ballot. SJR 6 requires a super majority
and it tries to be consistent in a different way with what
the intent of the original constitutional convention was in
requiring two-thirds of the legislature to put a question on
the ballot. Senator Halford explained that if an issue goes
to the ballot by the initiative process, it then requires
two-thirds of those voting on the question. He said it
builds a safety valve without taking away all the
protections for minorities.
Number 063
SENATOR TAYLOR asked Senator Halford if he has applied the
two-thirds vote question to other states that can change
their constitution by initiative. Senator Halford explained
that California is probably the worst example of the use of
an initiative process and most of their initiatives don't
pass. He said it takes a certain amount of dollars to pay
people to collect the signatures. The result is the group
that opposes the initiative gets a counter initiative on the
ballot. He noted most of the time both initiatives fail.
Senator Halford continued to discuss the process in
California.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN indicated that he is a co-sponsor of the
legislation and he believes that the bill is a good step in
the right direction. He asked if research is available as
to how many of the initiatives have passed that have been on
the ballot, in Alaska, since statehood. Senator Halford
continued to read information which would have passed
including changes to the Commission on Judicial Conduct, the
veteran's housing, resident hiring preference, change of
name to Lieutenant Governor, right to privacy, voting on
constitutional amendments in general elections, limited
entry fisheries, etc. He noted that there is one state that
allows initiative access to the constitution only in the
area of limitations on government. Senator Halford
concluded that there is a need for public access to the
constitution.
Chairman Leman explained that in Alaska, it is relatively
easy to get issues on the ballot and to have a number of
issues on the ballot may clutter the ballot. They may not
get the two-thirds vote, but they would be there. He said
it might be just that much more for people to wade through
when they are voting. He asked if it would be better to
make it more difficult to get the issue on the ballot and
for it to pass once it reached the ballot. SENATOR HALFORD
said he believes that making it more difficult to get an
issue on the ballot probably has more merit than making it
easier to pass once it is on the ballot.
Number 175
SENATOR DUNCAN asked if there is information as to how many
states allow amending their constitution through initiative.
He also asked if a lot of states are leaning toward the
initiative direction. Senator Halford indicated he would
get the information.
CHIP THOMA, representing himself, testified in support of
SJR 6. He said it allows valid access, by the people, for
the purposes of recall. He discussed his dealings with the
recall of the governor and lieutenant governor over the last
year and a half. He explained in the research of the
constitutional records and the subsequent statutes, which
have been implemented by the legislature dealing with
recall, it is very obvious that the elected officials and
those who wanted to be elected officials at the
constitutional convention, threw up impediments to recall
elected officials. Mr. Thoma explained that it now takes
thirty-five percent of those who voted in the previous
election to sign petitions for a recall to get on the
ballot. However, for Ross Perot to get on the ballot, it
took only one percent. He discussed eliminating judicial
review of the grounds for recall and lowering the petition
gathering to five percent. Mr. Thoma continued to give
testimony in favor of the resolution.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN indicated that he would like to hold the
legislation until the next meeting.
Number 275
There being no further business to come before the
committee, Chairman Leman adjourned the meeting at 9:24 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|