Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
03/16/2006 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB306 | |
| HB410 | |
| HB326 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 410 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 326 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SB 306 | ||
HB 410-REVISOR'S BILL
9:32:26 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced HB 410 to be up for consideration.
PAMELA FINLEY, Revisor, Legal Services, introduced HB 410 and
explained to the committee that the bill was required by statute
for the purpose of clean up errors in the statute when the
policy has been decided and is clear. The source of the
revisions is their own review, suggestions from the Executive
Branch and members of the public. She offered to answer
questions.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT asked the reason for Sections 27 and 29
of the bill.
MS. FINLEY said the statute was renumbered to keep the
references to money in the same provisions.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked what would happen if the change wasn't
made.
MS. FINLEY said the court would construe it to read as it reads.
She said it should be cleared up so that wouldn't be necessary.
9:34:16 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Finley her criteria for evaluating
the difference between pure clean up and substantive change.
MS. FINLEY explained, for example, Section 17 on page 6
established a division of worker's compensation because SB 130
created the division and kept talking about the director but it
was never established in statute. She said the only thing she
didn't know was who would appoint the director and so she used
the standard procedure of the commissioner appointing the
director. That was an example of a substantive change.
9:36:37 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved CSHB 410(JUD) from committee with
individual recommendations. Hearing no objections, the motion
carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|