Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
02/22/2018 03:15 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| HJR27 | |
| HB310 | |
| HB152 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HJR 27 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 310 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 152 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 310-MARRIAGE AND MINIMUM AGE FOR MARRIAGE
3:54:46 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 310, "An Act relating to the minimum age
of eligibility for marriage."
3:55:07 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 3:55 p.m.
3:55:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MATT CLAMAN, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor of HB 310, relayed that by raising the minimum marriage
age in Alaska to 18 with exceptions only for emancipated minors
and active military members, HB 310 would put an end to what the
U.S. has denounced as a "human rights abuse." He continued by
saying that marriage before the age of 18 correlates with poor
life outcomes, including discontinued education, increased risk
of psychiatric disorders, and increased risk of poverty. For
those who are happily married at an earlier age or who are close
to someone who married young, the proposed legislation might
seem like it would prevent young people from marrying the person
whom they love. He said that in fact, the proposed legislation
would delay rather than prevent the unions of those looking
forward to decades of happy marriage.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN referred to the Legislative Research
Services (LRS) Report 18.018 dated 9/15/17, entitled "State
Marriages Involving Minors, 2000-2015," included in the
committee packet. He stated that Table 1 in the report reflects
the number of Alaska marriages involving minors that occurred
from 2000 to 2015. Table 1 indicates that the number of minors
getting married in Alaska is in decline - from 73 in 2000 to 17
in 2015. He maintained that by asking an increasingly small
number of people to wait a couple of years before getting
married, Alaska would protect minors, who because of external
pressure and lack of legal rights, might find themselves forced
into marriages that they are later unable to leave.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN relayed that 70-80 percent of marriages
involving children end in divorce; and when they do, because of
limited education and work opportunities, former child brides
and grooms have few options for supporting themselves and, in
many cases, supporting their children. He maintained that in
those instances, the economic burden falls to the state.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN maintained that under HB 310, the hope is
to bring an end to a human rights abuse that affects not just
individuals but society.
3:57:40 PM
CERI GODINEZ, Staff, Representative Matt Claman, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Claman, prime sponsor
of HB 310, relayed that the intent of HB 310 is to protect
children from finding themselves in lifelong commitments in
which they have no say and cannot escape. She paraphrased from
the sponsor statement, included in the committee packet, which
read as follows:
Under current law, Alaskan minors cannot vote, serve
on a jury, purchase a fire arm, open a checking
account on their own, file a domestic violence
protective order on their own, or work without the
consent of their parents; yet they are old enough to
be married with parental approval or a court ruling in
the case of those under 16. This places a child in a
particularly vulnerable situation where they could be
coerced into marrying an abuser. If the relationship
is abusive, leaving their spouse may be extremely
difficult. House Bill 310 would protect minors by
requiring them to have the same rights as adults
before getting married.
MS. GODINEZ continued with a sectional analysis of HB 310 as
follows: Section 1 of HB 310 [page 1, lines 8-12] requires for
marriage a person to be 18 years of age or older, an emancipated
minor, or a member of the U.S. Armed Forces on active duty.
Section 2 [page 1, line 14-15] relates to "arrival at majority
upon marriage" and amends AS 25.20.020 to say that a person
reaches the age of majority when he/she marries. Section 3,
[page 2, line 4] repeals AS 25.05.171, which allows minors 16 to
18 years of age to marry with parental consent and minors 14 to
15 years of age to marry with judicial approval and parental
consent. Section 4 [page 2, lines 5-8] states that the Act
applies to people married on or after the effective date.
3:59:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX referred to page 1, line 9, which read,
"emancipated under AS 09.55.590", and asked for the definition
of "emancipated."
MS. GODINEZ answered that "emancipated" means the person is 16
years of age or older, living separately from his/her parents or
guardians, and can prove himself/herself to be self-supporting.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to what was involved for
emancipation; she asked why a minor wouldn't just petition for
emancipation [to marry].
MS. GODINEZ expressed her understanding that under HB 310, a
minor could seek emancipation and if successful, file for
marriage.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if that is a loophole that almost
subsumes the proposed legislation; the minor would not be
required to be age 18 but could simply petition for
emancipation.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN explained that the difference between the
two is as follows: to get emancipated one needs to have a court
hearing with a judge to determine if the qualifications for
emancipation are met; under HB 310, one can get married with
parental consent without proving self-sufficiency.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for the number of children under age
16 who are married in Alaska each year.
MS. GODINEZ replied that the number each year is between zero
and one. She clarified that someone who is emancipated has most
of the legal rights of an adult. She mentioned that the intent
of HB 310 is to ensure that people entering marriage are on
equal legal footing with their spouses.
4:02:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether those who are 16 through 18
years of age and get married are marrying against their wills.
She related that she has a friend who was married at age 17 and
has been married for 30 years; the friend had her parents'
permission; and she wasn't forced to marry.
MS. GODINEZ responded that there are many cases of people
happily married at age 16. The proposed legislation would ask
those people to wait a couple of years so that in the rare cases
in which someone is being forced into marriage by external
pressure from their families or other parties, that marriage
would be prevented.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX summarized by saying that although there
are many cases in which people get married at age 16 who have
workable marriages, HB 310 proposes that they forego marriage
for two years because of the extremely rare incidence in which
someone is forced into marriage.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN referred to Table 1 of the LRS Report to
point out that there are very few people getting married at ages
16 and 17, and of those, the clear majority get divorced and are
left in very poor financial conditions due to low functioning
during the marriage.
4:04:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH cited the LRS Report to point out that the
number of marriages of those age 17 and under decreased from 73
in 2000 to 14 in 2015; it decreased to zero for the 15 and under
age group; and there was only 1 in the 15 and under age group in
the most recent five years shown on the chart. He offered that
half of marriages end up in divorce regardless of age. He asked
whether minors could be married in another state and have it
recognized in Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN expressed his belief that under the "Full
Faith and Credit Clause" [U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section
1] a marriage in Nevada, for example, would be recognized in
Alaska, if legal in Nevada.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether two people, who cannot
legally be married in Alaska, could travel to another state,
like Nevada, where it is permissible to be married at age 16,
then return to Alaska to live.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN offered that he believes that to be the
case; under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S.
Constitution, Alaska would have to recognize the marriage that
occurred in Nevada.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether there are any religious
issues associated with the proposed legislation or whether it
would violate any religious jurisdiction. He clarified, "Is
there a religious exemption?"
MS. GODINEZ responded that the sponsor has not received any
opposition from religious minorities.
4:08:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP referred to page 1, lines 11-12, of HB 310
and asked if there is anyone under age 18 in the active
military.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN relayed that with parental consent,
someone can join the military at age 17. The military exemption
is included for the occasion of someone being deployed and
wanting to marry his/her sweetheart before leaving. He
maintained that there is considerable history of people getting
married just before deployment; there are spousal benefits,
which is an important factor.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked about the language change on page 1,
lines 4-5: the deletion of "one man and one woman" and the
addition of "two natural persons".
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN explained that was recommended because
that is what the U.S. Constitution requires.
4:10:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether under the military exemption,
someone could enroll in the military at age 17 with parental
consent and marry someone 16 years of age who is not in the
military. He asked whether the exemption would exist for the
16-year-old spouse as well.
MS. GODINEZ expressed her understanding that the exemption would
apply to the underage military enrollee marrying an adult.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL pointed out that page 1, line 11, states
that the member of the U.S. Armed Forces may be under age 18.
He offered that a 17-year-old boy [in the military] can marry a
21-year-old woman but could not marry a 17-year-old woman not in
the military.
MS. GODINEZ agreed.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN added that if the 17-year-old woman not in
the military got emancipated, then the marriage could proceed.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether in the case of a 16- or 17-
year-old who has received emancipation through a judge and
really wanted to get married, parental consent would be
necessary.
MS. GODINEZ replied that in that scenario, the person would need
judicial approval and parental consent. The exception to
parental consent is an extreme case, in which the parents are
unfit to decide the matter.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL mentioned that his aunt got married at age
16 a long time ago; getting married at a younger age was more
common then than today. He mentioned that marriage right before
"shipping off to war" seems a little dated but conceded that it
does occur.
4:13:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK referred to the document, entitled "Child
Marriage in America Executive Summary," provided by the sponsor
and included in the committee packet. He asked for the
definitions of "minors," "children," and "adults" and the lines
of demarcation for the three groups.
MS. GODINEZ expressed her belief that the words "children" and
"minors" are being used interchangeably in the document, and
they refer to people under the age of 18. She confirmed that
anyone age 18 to 21 is not a minor.
4:15:09 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony on HB 310.
4:15:25 PM
JEANNE SMOOT, Tahirih Justice Center (TJC), testified that the
Tahirih Justice Center is a 20-year-old national legal services
organization that works with survivors of domestic violence,
sexual assault, and other violence and abuse, including forced
marriages. She relayed that forced marriages can involve
insidious forms of coercion, not only physical violence but
extreme psychological abuse and threats. When that comes from a
parent or a loved one, it does have the effect of "a gun to the
head" or "shotgun wedding" for a teenage girl who is still very
dependent on her family both emotionally and practically.
MS. SMOOT stated that TJC has operated a special forced marriage
initiative across the country and over the past several years;
it worked on over 500 cases involving women and girls across the
U.S. The organization also has analyzed the minimum marriage
laws and exceptions for all 50 states and released a detailed
report on how the current laws can facilitate forced marriages
and other abuses and exploitation in the guise of marriage.
MS. SMOOT continued by saying that based on the work that TJC
has done, she has flagged a few of the concerns that Alaska's
current law poses in terms of serious child protection risks.
She stated that the parental consent exception can conceal
parental coercion; among the forced marriage cases, most often
the perpetrator is a parent. There are many reasons for this,
but sometimes it's because a parent just wants to be rid of
additional responsibility for a girl and to offload her onto
whomever will take her. She said that regardless of the
backgrounds of these cases, the common vulnerability is that
children lack the legal rights and resources to stand up for
themselves and get to safety.
MS. SMOOT mentioned that the low age of 14 falls even below the
state's legal age of consent for sex, and combined with the
affirmative defense to prosecution for statutory rape that is in
Alaska statute, it means that as long as the parties are
married, one can essentially "roadmap" a "work around" for
predators to access young girls that would otherwise be off
limits.
MS. SMOOT stated a third concern for flagging: Only a handful
of the minors currently being married ever see a judge. The
concern is that the approval process has only vague and
subjective criteria and doesn't have other critical safeguards,
like court-appointed counsel for the minor. She said that,
unfortunately, for the reasons she has stated, Alaska's current
laws make it far too easy for a host of horrors - ones that TJC
staff see every day - lurking behind the marriage of an underage
girl, no questions asked. She said, "That is the crux of the
problem with current law." She maintained that TJC does not
know how many of the cases behind the statistics are forced
marriages of children. Based on TJC work and the
vulnerabilities staff see, they are very concerned precisely
because the children marrying today are marrying against
national trends. They represent particularly vulnerable
children who have no say in the matter and whose parents or
partners are not listening to them ... (indisc.).
MS. SMOOT stated that this year alone, 15 states have taken up
reform bills; 8 more are on the horizon. Virginia passed a law
like HB 310, but the year before the law passed, 182 minors were
married, including one younger than age 15.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked for a written copy of Ms. Smoot's
testimony.
4:19:30 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS, after ascertaining that there was no one
else who wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 310.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 310 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR027 Sponsor Statement 1.19.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 27 |
| HJR027 ver A 1.19.18.PDF |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 27 |
| HJR027 Fiscal Note-LEG-02-16-18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 27 |
| HJR027 Supporting Document- Letter of Support 2.19.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 27 |
| HJR27 Supporting Document-Letter of Support 2.23.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 27 |
| HB310 Sponsor Statement 2.6.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 ver A 2.6.18.PDF |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Fiscal Note DHSS 2.16.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document-Child Marriage in America Executive Summary 2.19.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document-Child Marriage in America 2.6.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document-Minors Married in Alaska 2.6.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document-Tahirih Child Marriage Backgrounder 2.6.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document- Letter from Office of Victim's Rights 2.20.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document- Letters of Support 2.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB310 Supporting Document-ACT Support Letter 2.27.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 310 |
| HB152 Sponsor Statement 4.12.17.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 1/25/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 152 |
| HB152 ver R 2.13.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 152 |
| HB152 Fiscal Note DMVA 1.20.18.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 1/25/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 152 |
| HB152 Supporting Document-DMVA Letter of Support 4.12.17.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 1/25/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 152 |
| HB152 Opposing Document-Letter Lawrence Wood 4.12.17.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 1/25/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 152 |
| HB152 Additional Documents-DMVA Letter and bill info 4.12.17.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 1/25/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/22/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 152 |