Legislature(1997 - 1998)
05/08/1998 07:30 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 313
"An Act relating to sponsor certification of initiative
petitions; relating to sponsor identification during
petition circulation; relating to the voidability of an
initiated law; placing limitations on the compensation
that may be paid to sponsors of initiative petitions;
prohibiting payments to persons who sign or refrain
from signing initiative petitions; and repealing
procedures for filing a supplementary initiative
petition."
Co-Chair Therriault provided members with a memorandum from
Richard Glover, dated May 8, 1998, regarding the
constitutionality of the legislation (copy on file). He
observed that a Supreme Court decision ruled that payment
for signatures could not be prohibited. The Court did not
specify if the amount could be limited. There is a current
court case regarding the requirement that an identification
badge be worn. The 10th circuit court ruled that this is
unconstitutional. The Supreme Court will consider the case.
The state of Alaska has signed a brief in support of the
constitutionality of this provision.
Representative Mulder MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1 during the
previous meeting. Amendment 1 would place a cap on the
payment for signatures. Representative Davies OBJECTED. He
spoke in support of a daily or hourly fee. He felt that a
fee per signature would result in a more aggressive approach
by the collector.
Representative Grussendorf expressed concern that problems
could occur with an hourly rate.
Representative Mulder spoke in support of the amendment. He
stressed that a cap of a dollar per signature would slow the
collection of signatures.
Representative Davies questioned the State's interest in
slowing signatures. He noted that the amendment would limit
the amount of money that can be paid. The existing language
only limits the manner of payment. He maintained that the
amendment would be closer to a constitutional challenge.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Davis, Kelly, Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Therriault
OPPOSED: Moses, Davies, Grussendorf
Co-Chair Hanley and Representative Foster were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (6-3).
Representative Davies MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2 (copy on
file). Co-Chair Therriault OBJECTED for the purpose of
discussion. Representative Davies explained that Amendment
2 would delete the requirement that the collector wear a
badge. He noted that the Court ruled that the badge
deprives the collector of the protections of anonymous
speech. He spoke in support of addressing the sponsorship
of the petition on the petition itself.
Co-Chair Therriault clarified that "sponsor" refers to the
person carrying the petition.
Representative Grussendorf spoke in support of Amendment 2.
Representative Mulder disclosed that he has been requested
to work on an initiative petition.
Representative Martin argued that the person gathering
signatures is not necessarily the sponsor. Co-Chair
Therriault reiterated that the legislation indicates that
the sponsor is the person carrying the petition.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Moses, Davies, Grussendorf, Kelly
OPPOSED: Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Davis, Therriault
Co-Chair Hanley and Representative Foster were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (4-5).
(Tape Change, HFC 98 - 164, Side 2)
Representative Davies WITHDREW Amendment 3. He MOVED to
ADOPT a conceptional amendment: "The name of the group
circulating the petition and the name of the group paying
for the petition, if different, shall both be prominently
displayed in bold, capital letters, on the bottom of each
signature page of the petition."
Representative Mulder spoke against the amendment.
Representative Davies stressed that it would be the same
disclosure as occurs when a sign is posted.
Representative Martin spoke against the amendment. Co-Chair
Therriault questioned how the amendment would distinguish
between a group that is paying to work the petition through
the system and a group of citizens that are not being paid
to collect signatures.
Representative Davies stressed that the intent is to
identify the group that is behind the petition. The group
can be identified through the Division of Elections or APOC.
Representative Grussendorf stated that he is opposed to paid
for petitions. He spoke in support of the amendment. He
expressed concern that any group could come to the state of
Alaska and pay for a petition.
Members questioned if the name of the group is already
listed on the top of the petition.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Moses, Davies, Davis, Kelly, Grussendorf
OPPOSED: Martin, Mulder, Kohring, Therriault
Co-Chair Hanley and Representative Foster were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (5-4).
Representative Davies referred to section 6. He noted that
section 6 repeals AS 15.45.170 and 15.45.230.
Co-Chair Therriault read:
AS 15.45.170: "Upon receipt of notice that the filing
of the petition was improper, the initiative committee
may amend and correct the petition by circulating and
filing a supplementary petition within 30 days of the
date that notice was given;"
And
AS 15.45.230: "An initiative submitted to the voters
may not be held void because of the insufficiency of
the application or petitions by which the submission
was procured."
Representative Davies MOVED to delete section 6. He noted
that the amendment would maintain the status quo.
Representative Kelly OBJECTED. He spoke in support of a
"drop dead" date. A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Davies, Grussendorf, Moses
OPPOSED: Davis, Kelly, Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Therriault
Co-Chair Hanley and Representative Foster were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-6).
Representative Davies MOVED to delete AS 15.45.230. Co-
Chair Therriault OBJECTED. Representative Davies spoke in
support of the amendment. He emphasized that if an
initiative is certified and goes on the ballot, then the
issue is decided. A small insufficiency in the gathering
process would not be sufficient to null the election. He
maintained that the statute would prevent frivolous
lawsuits. A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Davies, Grussendorf, Moses, Martin
OPPOSED: Davis, Kelly, Kohring, Mulder, Therriault
Co-Chair Hanley and Representative Foster were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (4-5).
Representative Davis MOVED to report HCS CSSB 313 (FIN) out
of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being
NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HCS CSSB 313 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a zero fiscal note by the Office of
the Lieutenant Governor dated 3/19/98.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|