Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
01/19/2018 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB216 | |
| HB15 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 216 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 15-MARRIAGE & SPOUSES
2:42:24 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 15, "An Act relating to marriage, adoption, birth
certificates, state custody of a minor, divorce, dissolution,
and legal separation; replacing the terms 'husband' and 'wife'
in certain statutes relating to loans, trusts, spousal immunity
and confidential marital communications, probate and nonprobate
transfers, life and health insurance, workers' compensation, and
property ownership; and making conforming amendments."
2:43:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Legislature, advised
that he had filed a similar bill, if not an identical bill, in
the Twenty-Ninth Alaska State Legislature, and the bill was
designed to respond to the decision under Obergefell v. Hodges,
576 U.S. ___ (2015). Under Obergefell, he offered, the
decisions read that marriage is a fundamental right to be
enjoyed by all persons and with whomever they choose. At the
time of the decisio and due to the outfall of the decision
itself, he believed that Alaska's statutes would require
updating and this bill almost "smacks" of that sort of feature.
He explained that the index of "our blue statutes" was reviewed
for all circumstances wherein the term "spouse" or "husband and
wife" was used to determine what parts of the code required
updating. This bill is mostly administrative in that respect,
and it is not designed to generate new (audio difficulties) for
people in a same sex coupled relationship. It is designed to
reflect the reality of the common law from several cases out of
the Alaska Supreme Court within the last decade of decisions.
Wherein, rights were extended to people in a same sex
relationship who could not be married, and in fact, rights were
extended because they could not be married and there had to be
some sort of equity for that fact. He referred to Hamby v.
Parnell, 56 F.Supp.3d 1056 (2014), and advised that it was one
of many of the forerunners to the Obergefell decision, and
offered that Hamby was heard in a state federal district court.
That decision was written by former President George Bush's
appointee to the District Court of Burgess; and the Obergefell
decision was written by former President Ronald Reagan's
appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Anthony Kennedy. He
described that these two judges are conservative judges by
nature, and they wrote these decisions. Representative
Josephson paraphrased a portion of the Justice Kennedy decision
as follows:
There are many aspects of the marital status,
including taxation, inheritance and property rights,
rules of intestate succession, spousal privilege and
the law of evidence, hospital access, medical
decision-making authority, adoption rights, the rights
and benefits of survivors, birth and death
certificates, professional ethics rules, campaign and
finance restrictions, workers' compensation benefits,
health insurance, and child custody support and
visitation rules.
2:47:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON advised that one can see that when
allowing anyone to marry the person they love, then there is a
natural order of things, which means statutes could be in need
of clean-up. This bill, he opined, will help trial courts
because it will help dispense with arguments which are bound to
not succeed because one could read the literal word of a statute
and forget that the common law left some of the statutes in its
tracks. There are a couple of amendments, one proposed by a
member of the committee; and another amendment, proposed by the
sponsor, that is relative to Section 19. He opined "The one the
committee identified was Section 6." Representative Josephson
then deferred to Linda Bruce, Legislative Legal and Research
Services as to whether this bill is mostly a clean-up bill,
gender-neutral language legislation, a road map, ministerial,
administrative, and designed so that the code reflects the new
law.
2:50:09 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked Ms. Bruce whether she agreed with
Representative Josephson's characterization of the bill as being
more of a ministerial clean-up bill, and not a bill that changes
the status of the law.
2:50:30 PM
LINDA BRUCE, Legislative Legal and Research Services, Alaska
State Legislature, responded that she does agree with that
statement because it is generally a simple clean-up bill
changing the language to be gender-neutral when it comes to
marriage.
2:51:15 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on HB 15.
2:51:29 PM
TARA RICH, Legal and Policy Director, American Civil Liberties
Union, Alaska (ACLU-Alaska), advised that the American Civil
Liberties Union, Alaska (ACLU-Alaska) supports this legislation
as a clean-up bill following several court decisions that made
clear that marriage is available for any couple. The American
Civil Liberties Union, Alaska (ACLU-Alaska) also believes that
it is important to change the language in the statute to make
clear that the laws are written for everyone. She pointed out
that the ACLU-Alaska had a case last year where an issue such as
this came up within a Child in Need of Aid (CINA) termination of
parental rights case. In this instance, a same-sex couple was
married with children by that marriage, and there was a
termination hearing as to one parent. Except, the Office of
Childrens' Services (OCS) did not feel the need to include the
spouse of that individual in that hearing. The ACLU-Alaska
filed an amicus brief, a friend of the court brief, in that case
and actually succeeded in getting them to agree to remand the
decision down to the lower court and have a hearing as to both
parents. As much as this is an administrative and a clean-up
bill, she related that she also thinks it is necessary to avoid
ambiguity.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD noted that the ACLU claims to protect
the constitutional rights of all Alaskans. She opined that some
people do not believe this is a clean-up bill, but rather it is
"dirtying a bill" and a lot of people want to be "grandfathered
in" because they believe their right to call their husband, a
husband in statute, and the right to call a wife, a wife, is
being violated. She asked whether the power belongs to the
people.
MS. RICH responded that the ACLU represents constitutional
issues and thus far it has had clear holdings on what the
constitution says and what it requires for marriage. She
commented that Representative Reinbold was correct in that
marriage be available for everyone.
2:54:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD advised that her question was whether
the power belongs to the people, and she said, "I'll answer
that, I believe yes, the power belongs to the people."
CHAIR CLAMAN interrupted and advised that this is an opportunity
to ask questions and not to argue with the person providing
public testimony.
2:54:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether the constitution had
changed, "or just your interpretation or some random judge's
interpretation." She then asked for a yes or no response to her
question as to whether the Constitution of the State of Alaska
read that a marriage is between a woman and a man.
MS. RICH explained that the constitution is interpreted by the
highest court in land and she stressed that it is
extraordinarily dangerous to be referring to it as "some random
judge." The ACLU goes by what the constitution says, and what
the highest court has interpreted (audio difficulties) to expand
people's rights and their liberties.
CHAIR CLAMAN advised Representative Reinbold that she has been
in this committee and other committees long enough to know that
the members wait and try not to talk over each other.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD said, "If you look at the Founding
Father's papers, the courts are the weakest branch and they are
actually supposed to interpret and just do an opinion, but they
don't write the statute." The constitution is the supreme law
of the land, and the constitution in Alaska, by the peoples'
initiative says that it is between a man and a woman, and some
people do not support judicial activism. She noted that many of
her constituents and others in Alaska, do not believe it should
have gone through judicial action, but actually through an
initiative by the people, or by statute, or a constitutional
change. She asked whether Ms. Rich agreed with her statement.
CHAIR CLAMAN ruled that he would not allow this debate to
continue. The committee members have all sworn to uphold the
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of
Alaska, he pointed out. While Representative Reinbold was
certainly entitled to have a different view other than the
courts, but eight people would like to testify in public
testimony and he will give them the chance.
2:56:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER declared a point of order. He expressed
that he wanted to put on the record that members should not be
disparaging other branches of government as to which one is more
powerful than the other.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN ruled that Representative Fansler's point
was well taken, and he continued public testimony.
2:57:18 PM
JAMES SQUIRES (audio difficulties throughout his testimony)
advised that he is a constituent of Representative George
Rauscher, and that as legislators, each member took an oath to
uphold and defend the constitution. He referred to the
Constitution of the Alaska, Article 1, Section 2, and Section
25, which read as follows:
Section 2. Source of Government.
All political power is inherent in the people. All
government originates with the people, is founded upon
their will only, and is instituted solely for the good
of the people as a whole.
Section 25. Marriage.
To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriage
may exist only between one man and one woman.
MR. SQUIRES commented that this amendment to the Constitution of
the State of Alaska (audio difficulties). He commented that HB
15 (audio difficulties) this amendment, (audio difficulties)
duty bound to (audio difficulties). The strongest
responsibility is Article 1, Section (audio difficulties) to
Alaskans. The House of Representatives is the closest body to
the people with elections held every two years, (audio
difficulties). He commented that some may feel conflicted and
cite supreme court judicial references that are "a long way from
Article 1, Section 2," and it is the Alaskans that put the
legislators in office. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution
of the United States stands on (audio difficulties) side to push
back against federal overreach, which is exactly what the will
of the people
3:06:04 PM
MIKE COONS advised that he took an oath to the Constitution of
the United States as a United States Airman and upheld his oath
throughout his service to this nation and opined that many
legislators and politician have never believed in that oath. He
related that he opposes HB 15 because Alaska does not recognize
same sex marriage, "I understand (audio difficulties) strongly
oppose the Ninth Circuit ruling disallowing our constitutional
amendment that marriage is between one man and one woman."
Sadly, he offered, Alaska's governor at the time refused to
(audio difficulties) the people of Alaska by not taking that
ruling to the United States Supreme Court. This bill gives
legitimacy to same-sex marriage, thus undermining any court
appeal in the future and yet the voters have shown that marriage
is sex sacred and are oppose to that which is not sacred in
God's eyes. This forum of public testimony in the House
Judiciary Standing Committee offers him protection from those
individuals who have and will try to deny his rights and views.
Yet, he said, he will not deny those individuals the right to be
wrong. He then called on all of the conservative members of the
House of Representatives to oppose this bill.
3:08:18 PM
WILLIAM HARRINGTON (audio difficulties throughout his testimony)
described the bill as an interesting subject (audio
difficulties) where two men, who were not in (audio
difficulties) relationship got married for tax purposes. The
idea (audio difficulties) wanted to make sure that the other one
got his estate, and marriage was the most (audio difficulties)
lie to make that happen. He opined that that is an indication
of how far society has gone, and (audio difficulties) people who
are in an intimate relationship get the same (audio
difficulties) can get married and (audio difficulties). He said
that the right of the individual can take control (audio
difficulties) for tax purposes by all legal means is everyone's
right.
3:09:34 PM
JOE SCHLANGER advised that he opposes HB 15, and paraphrased
Genesis 2:24, as follows: "Therefore a man shall leave his
father and mother and be joined to his wife and they should
become one flesh." He offered his belief that HB 15 is
unconstitutional according to Article 1, Section 25 of the
Constitution of the State of Alaska, as follows:
Section 25. Marriage
To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriage
may exist only between one man and one woman.
MR. SCHLANGER argued that HB 15 attempts to change the
constitution, and that the committee will not stand up to the
"ACLU who has presented this. This is exactly who presented
this, and I oppose that." He argued that "you guys" are trying
the change our traditional ways of being a Christian, while
constantly being called a bigot because "we speak out against"
this sort of bill. He asked the committee to vote no on this
bill.
3:11:18 PM
SARAH VANCE said that while this bill proposes to expand the
rights of person identifying as the LGBTQ community, she pointed
out that this only represents about 2.5 percent of Alaska's
population. She asked what happened to representing the 97.5
percent of heterosexuals who value the current gender specific
identity relating to marriage. Passing this bill, she
commented, will take away her right to be legally titled "wife
and mother" and promoting gender neutrality limits her identity
to be "no more than a spouse or a person." She noted that she
considers it to be an honor and a privilege to be legally titled
"a wife and a mother, which is something I aspired to more than
anything else in my life." She referred to birth certificates
and said that by gender neutralizing the role of the father, it
perpetuates confusion to the biological role and the ultimate
identity of a child. This legislation further continues the
agenda of eliminating gender roles and creates doubt in "our
identity" as a man and a woman. She offered that this bill does
not represents the priorities of Alaskans, and she asked the
committee to vote no on HB 15.
3:12:58 PM
ADAM HIKES advised that he soon will be married to the most
beautiful woman in the world, and this legislation "absolutely
breaks my heart" in that it would redefine marriage as two
people, instead of one man and one woman. He described that
that takes away his position as a husband and a prospective
father, and ask what he should tell his children, "I am just a
spouse?" In taking this away, it is dissolving marriage wherein
it is an honor and privilege to be called a husband or a wife.
He noted that this honor and privilege is not to be taken away
by a small minority of people who do not represent the whole
population. He advised that it is being pushed by the ACLU and
it does not have the interests of everyone in mind because it
has a particular agenda it has been pushing up and down the West
Coast. Alaska does not need to do things in the same manner as
the states of Oregon, California, or Washington. He commented
for the 3 percent of the population to dictate what life looks
like to the rest of the 97 percent, "that is fascism, that is
not okay with me."
3:14:58 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN left public testimony open on HB 15.
3:15:12 PM
[CHAIR CLAMAN and Representative Reinbold discussed her
opportunity to respond to Representative Fansler's point of
order.]
[HB 15 was held over.]