Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205
04/13/2016 08:00 AM Senate 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 | |
| HJR14 | |
| HB126 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 126 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 14 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HJR 14-CALL FOR US COUNTERMAND CONVENTION
8:14:22 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced the consideration of HJR 14.
SENATOR COGHILL moved to adopt the Senate CS for CSHJR 14(STA),
version P, as the working document.
CHAIR STOLTZE objected for discussion purposes. He explained
that on line 6, page 1, the word "utilizing" was replaced with
the word "use" and updated changes in Congress since the measure
was last before the committee.
He removed his objection. Seeing no further objection he
announced the CS was adopted.
8:15:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SHELLEY HUGHES, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of HJR 14, explained that HJR 14 was a single
issue convention call for countermand, which means "veto." She
said the countermand intent was to restore the balance between
the state and federal government. She remarked that she did not
see the federal government as an enemy and noted that the
federal government did important things that included the
country's military; however, the federal government sometimes
has gone too far and just does not know what is best.
She specified that HJR 14 would add a mechanism to the
Constitution through the Article 5 process which would allow
states to "countermand" or "veto" a federal decision that
included a law passed by Congress, a regulation put in place by
a federal agency, a judicial decision, or an executive order.
She detailed the Article 5 process as follows:
1. 34 states are needed to call the convention.
2. States would convene at the convention and a simple
majority, 26 states, would be needed to approve the
amendment.
3. Approved amendment goes out to the states and 38 states
would be required to ratify the amendment.
4. 30 states or three-fifths would have to agree within an 18-
month period that a certain federal decision was null and
void.
8:17:38 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE asked Representative Hughes to explain the
interplay between HJR 14 and HJR 4.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES explained that HJR 4 was a delegate
resolution that applied should 34 states call for a convention.
She detailed that a delegate resolution would set the sidebars
and specific instructions for the delegates' parameters to stay
on the straight-and-narrow. She pointed out that the U.S.
Constitution was held dear and the intent was not for the
Constitution to be dismantled.
CHAIR STOLTZE explained that the legislative intent was to keep
the two measures traveling together.
8:19:50 AM
At ease.
8:20:26 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE called the committee back to order and opened
public testimony.
8:20:36 AM
MIKE COONS, National Legislative Director, Citizens Initiatives,
Palmer, Alaska, testified in support of HJR 14. He revealed that
Citizens Initiatives worked closely with Representative Hughes
and Chair Stoltze in getting HJR 14 passed.
SENATOR COGHILL moved to report the Senate CS for CS for HJR
14(STA) from committee with individual recommendations and
attached zero fiscal note.
8:21:50 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that hearing no objection, SCS CSHJR
14(STA) moved from committee.