HJR 3: LIMITING TERMS OF LEGISLATORS MS. HORETSKI called the members' attention to a draft committee substitute (CSHJR 3 (JUD)), dated March 24, 1993. She reminded the committee that they had suggested referring to calendar years, instead of terms, to avoid ambiguity. She said that that change had been incorporated into CSHJR 3 (JUD). MS. HORETSKI noted another change included in CSHJR 3 (JUD), on page 1, line 12. The new version of the resolution stated that "no person may serve consecutively more than fourteen full calendar years". An earlier version of the resolution provided that no person could serve consecutively "more than eleven full or partial calendar years", she said. Number 426 CHAIRMAN PORTER commented that CSHJR 3 (JUD). Number 431 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON said that it might be a compromise, but he still found it to be bad public policy. He predicted that the resolution would spawn litigation, and asked why the legislature desired to limit the public's choice. He stated that the resolution went overboard in attempting to fix a problem which did not exist. He noted that this year, there were 18 new House members. He said that there would be a negative effect on the legislature if there was an even higher concentration of new legislators after the next election. He recommended that the committee not move the resolution out. Number 458 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES commented that term limits already existed, at the voting booth. However, she said that most of her constituents felt that term limits were needed. She expressed an opinion that the legislature would benefit from a high concentration of new members every two years. Number 472 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON replied that he had not intended to slight the freshmen legislators. He noted that thoroughly learning the legislative process took a great deal of time. He added that institutional memory helped new legislators to learn. Number 484 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS noted that a constitutional revision task force might be formed to work during the interim. She said that it might be appropriate to refer HJR 3 to that task force for study. Number 500 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND made a MOTION to ADOPT CSHJR 3 (JUD), dated March 24, 1993. There being no objection, IT WAS ADOPTED. Number 504 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND made a MOTION to PASS CSHJR 3 (JUD), dated March 24, 1993, out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. Number 510 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON asked if this meant that there would never be the opportunity to hold a bill in the House Judiciary Committee for further study. Number 519 CHAIRMAN PORTER replied in the negative. He noted that there had been a great deal of discussion over the years, both within the legislature and outside of it, on the issue of term limits. Number 522 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said that, realistically, if the committee was having such a difficult time moving the resolution out, how could the resolution win a 2/3 vote on the House floor. Number 528 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND commented that the best place to vote on the resolution was on the House floor. There being no objection to moving CSHJR 3 (JUD) out of committee, IT WAS SO ORDERED. CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up HB 61 next.