Legislature(2019 - 2020)GRUENBERG 120
01/23/2020 03:00 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 | |
| HB187 | |
| HJR15 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 187 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HJR 15-CONST. AM: VOTES NEEDED FOR VETO OVERRIDE
3:51:03 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 15, Proposing an amendment to the
Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to actions upon
veto.
3:51:17 PM
KEVIN MCGOWAN, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, on
behalf of Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, prime sponsor of HJR
15, relayed that the proposed constitutional amendment would
lower the veto override threshold for appropriation bills from
three-fourths of legislators - 45 votes - to two-thirds of
legislators, or 40 votes. He said that currently veto overrides
of non-appropriation bills in Alaska require two-thirds of
legislators. He stated that HJR 15 would create a uniform veto
override vote threshold for appropriation and non-appropriation
bills. He maintained that Alaska's threshold is
disproportionate to every other U.S. state and territory; it is
the highest threshold.
3:52:26 PM
JOSIAH NASH, Intern, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, on
behalf of Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, prime sponsor of HJR
15, relayed that Alaska is the only state in the union with a
three-fourths veto override vote threshold for appropriation
bills. Every other state has a two-thirds, three-fifths, or
simple majority vote threshold. He referred to a graphic
summary [not included in the committee packet] of the
information provided to the committee on veto override vote
thresholds by state [Table 98-6.22 Vote Required to Override a
Veto of Selected Types of Bills, National Conference of State
Legislatures]. He said that 38 states have a two-thirds
threshold, 6 have a three-fifths threshold, and 5 have a simple
majority threshold; that leaves Alaska as the only state with a
high three-fourths vote threshold.
3:53:28 PM
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that he introduced the proposed
resolution before there had been any vetoes in the last budget
cycle [fiscal year 2020 (FY 20)]. He offered that the veto
override vote threshold in the Alaska State Constitution is an
anomaly, and through the proposed resolution, he is seeking to
avoid the "train wreck coming down the tracks." He relayed that
despite varying points of view on the budget last year [2019]
and on whether the vetoes should have been overridden, Alaska is
"way out of line" from the rest of the country. He said that
the Alaska Territorial Legislature had a two-thirds veto
override vote threshold for all measures - appropriations and
non-appropriations. He offered that in the minutes of the
Alaska Constitutional Convention, there was a great deal of
discussion on this issue and two camps of thinking. The "three-
fourths camp" won by a vote in the Alaska Constitutional
Convention; however, the very concerns put forth by those
advocating for a two-thirds vote have existed throughout history
in Alaska whenever the legislative branch of government has
sought to put a check on the executive branch of government. He
offered that having a three-fourths threshold essentially gives
the executive branch and its administration a blank check to
execute its agenda and vision through the "veto pen." He
suggested that if an environmental governor two terms from now
wanted to end the mining industry in Alaska and line-item veto
the Division of Mining, Land, and Water in the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) budget, that governor would likely be
able to do that because the override veto threshold is so
incredibly high. Regardless of the person [at the top of] the
executive branch and the administration, there is a clear
imbalance in the separation of powers in Alaska, and HJR 15
seeks to re-balance the separation of powers.
3:56:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed her belief that it is important
to have public input on the proposed resolution.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS relayed that whenever a constitutional
framework has two different override thresholds - one for
appropriation measures and one for non-appropriation measures -
it inherently creates constitutional ambiguity about what
constitutes an appropriation and what does not. A uniform flat
override threshold avoids that ambiguity. He mentioned that in
the '90s, then Governor Tony Knowles vetoed a bill from the
legislature that gave the University of Alaska a large land
grant. The legislature mustered a two-thirds vote to override
the veto, but not a three-fourths vote. Governor Knowles
rejected the override calling the legislation an appropriation
bill. The legislature contended that it was not an
appropriation bill and sued the governor. The Alaska Supreme
Court found in favor of the legislature. He concluded that not
having a flat uniform threshold, but having two categories of
override thresholds, creates ambiguity, and it's the lawyers who
profit.
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW asked for confirmation that at the Alaska
Constitutional Convention, the threshold was originally two-
thirds vote for all measures.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS responded that the Alaska Territorial
Legislature - before statehood - had a flat two-thirds
threshold. At the Alaska Constitutional Convention there was
debate on the topic; some delegates advocated for two-thirds,
some for three-fourths. The three-fourths camp won the debate.
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW mentioned that Article II, Section 16, of
the constitution was amended in 1976 and asked for the specifics
of that amendment.
CO-CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS answered that he did not know but would
have that information at the next hearing.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS indicated HJR 15 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR 15 v. M 1.21.2020.PDF |
HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 15 |
| HJR 15 Sponsor Statement 1.21.2020.pdf |
HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 15 |
| HJR 15 Sectional Analysis v. M 1.21.2020.pdf |
HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 15 |
| HJR 15 Supporting Document - NCSL Table 1.21.2020.pdf |
HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 15 |
| HB 187 Ver E 1.22.2020.PDF |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Sponsor Statement ver E 1.22.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Sectional Analysis 1.21.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Supporting Document ACOA 10.17.19 Letter to Governor Dunleavy 1.21.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Supporting Documents 2016 US DOJ Memo Ending Private Prisons 1.22.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Supporting Document-ACOA Private Prisons Book 1.22.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Supporting Document-News Clip-California bans private prisons 1.22.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 Supporting Document-ADN News Clip 1.22.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HJR 15 Presentation 1.21.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 15 |
| HB 187 Supporting Document Anchorage Resolution 1.23.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |
| HB 187 PPT 1.22.2020.pdf |
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 187 |