Legislature(2007 - 2008)BELTZ 211
03/20/2008 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB198 | |
| SB199 | |
| SCR12|| SB203 | |
| SB213 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 198 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 203 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SCR 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 199 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 213 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SCR 12-AMEND UNIFORM RULES: ABSTAIN FROM VOTING
SB 203-LEGISLATIVE ETHICS: VOTING & CONFLICTS
9:53:28 AM
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of SCR 12 and SB 203.
MICHELLE SYDEMAN, Staff to Senator Bill Wielechowski, said SCR
12 will bring Alaska in line with most other states prohibiting
legislators who have a substantial financial stake from voting
on a bill. She said 65 percent of states do this, including
Colorado, Florida, Maine, Texas and Washington. An additional 35
percent allow legislators with substantial conflicts to request
permission to abstain. Most of these states permit abstention if
a majority of legislators vote to grant it. Alaska is the only
state that requires unanimous consent before a legislator with a
conflict can abstain from a vote. The Center for Ethics in
Government knows of no other states. The House Clerk and the
Senate Secretary do not recall a single time when permission to
abstain was granted. Alaska is at the far end of the spectrum,
even among states with small citizen legislatures. Existing
statutes go to lengths to insure that conflicts are substantial
before a legislator would be required to abstain. Any benefit a
legislator might receive from supporting a particular piece of
legislation would have to be greater than the benefit a large
group of Alaskans would receive in order to require abstention.
A legislator who teaches during the interim could vote on the
salary of teachers, because the gain is shared among many.
9:56:47 AM
MS. SYDEMAN said SCR 12 would require legislators to declare
their conflict, identify the provision of the ethics act that
would be violated, and abstain from voting. A request to abstain
due to anything other than ethical concerns would still require
unanimous consent. There will be few instances that a member
will be able to demonstrate direct and substantial economic
benefit that is greater than that received by the substantial
class of persons to which that legislator belongs as a member of
a profession, industry or region. This is the existing language
of AS24.60.030. In those rare instances, this change in the
uniform rules would provide assurance that decisions are made in
the public interest. It would also protect legislators from
allegations that a vote was influenced by personal concerns.
SENATOR BUNDE said "a large or substantial number" is squishy.
He would like a better definition.
MS. SYDEMAN said it is terminology used across the country. She
couldn't find a state with a good definition. She believes it is
left to the discretion of the ethics committees. It is also the
existing language in Alaska's statutes right now.
9:58:38 AM
SENATOR BUNDE said that Ms. Sydeman mentioned that teachers
would be a substantial group, and he asked about fishers, crab
fishers, hair crab fisher, and how to determine substantial.
MS. SYDEMAN said she has this discussion with many people across
the country and she hasn't gotten a clear answer. The decision
must be made on a case-by-case basis.
SENATOR BUNDE said he applauds the goal but questions the
mechanism for getting there.
9:59:36 AM
SENATOR STEVENS said there are conflicts of interest when voting
on the floor. There are also conflicts elsewhere. For example,
he retired from the university and was asked him to come back to
teach a class. Legislative attorneys said he can't work at the
university because he votes on the university budget. What is
the connection with that conflict and a voting one?
10:00:38 AM
MS. SYDEMAN said those are separate parts of state statutes.
DAN WAYNE, Legal and Research Services Division, said there is a
specific statute keeping legislators from taking certain jobs.
The concern, he believes, was about exerting influence to get a
job -- being hired because of legislative status.
SENATOR BUNDE said he had the same experience. The constitution
says a person cannot have two positions of profit with the
state. A public school teacher can be a legislator because
schools are "not directly a facet of the state" as the
university is. There was a legislator from Juneau who taught at
the university, and no one challenged it.
10:03:00 AM
SENATOR FRENCH said he couldn't work as a prosecutor in the off
season for the state but he could for a municipality.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said many lawmakers have been talking about this
and it has been awkward. It would be helpful to see how other
states handle it. For this small community everyone knows
everyone, and a large number of people may get conflicted out.
SENATOR STEVENS said legislators don't want to take a position
on an issue where their constituents are split, and it might be
convenient not to vote. Now, a person has to vote. He questioned
how the legislature operates when people can weasel out on a
vote. It might be difficult to get anything done if there were a
narrow majority.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if this would change the tally of votes
required to pass a bill.
MS. SYDEMAN said those requirements are in the constitution.
SENATOR FRENCH asked about a difficult issue, like a phone war,
where members would skip out on the vote by declaring a false
conflict of interest. He asked what happens in that instance.
10:06:42 AM
MS. SYDEMAN said that is an important question. The ethics
committee could make a determination. There could be a mechanism
for the body to determine if a conflict is real. It could be
rulings by a presiding officer or a vote by the body. The
uniform rules once called for a majority vote to determine
whether a member did have a substantial conflict, and then it
went to a two-thirds vote, and now it is unanimous consent.
SENATOR BUNDE said if SCR 12 becomes law, "and I declare a
conflict, then whether I had one or not and was prohibited from
voting would be a matter of a majority vote in the body."
MS. SYDEMAN said that is not the intent of this bill. It relies
on the judgment of the individual legislator, so that no other
members have to judge. "This bill leaves that completely up to
the determination of individual legislators." People thought
there could be political maneuvering if one member were to be
judged by a majority. A member with a conflict must go on record
and make the determination. If there is abuse, the ethics
committee is there.
10:09:17 AM
SENATOR BUNDE said the bill creates a huge opportunity for a
member not to vote on tough issues. He has a friend who lost an
election because he stood up and took the tough vote, "and he
could've ducked it." He asked how the ethics committee can
consider someone unethical who thinks there is some personal
financial impact. They may have to do a polygraph.
SENATOR STEVENS said one option is having the rules committee or
legislative council decide. But that would throw sand in the
wheels, and some may take advantage of that. The legislature,
now, is not as bad as some options being considered.
SENATOR BUNDE asked about another member deciding someone else
shouldn't vote.
MS. SYDEMAN said that is why the bill leaves it up to the member
- we didn't want other members pointing fingers.
10:12:27 AM
SENATOR GREEN asked, "How many other instances has the
legislature amended the uniform rules in statute?"
MS. SYDEMAN said this would not amend the uniform rules through
statute; it is a concurrent resolution. This particular rule has
been amended twice.
SENATOR GREEN asked if it was amended by the adoption of new
uniform rules or by direction in statute.
10:13:10 AM
MS. SYDEMAN said she believes it was done in a joint session of
the legislature, but she is not sure.
SENATOR GREEN said the uniform rules and the adoption of Mason's
current manual were really big issues when she was newly
elected. She hasn't heard that conversation as much recently,
but the uniform rules are considered powerful in order to keep
the legislature in charge of its business. The court has
recognized that. It makes her nervous to amend them without the
adoption of a whole new set of uniform rules.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said she will set the bill aside, but it is good
for bringing up this discussion. Members have been struggling
with how to handle conflicts. The body may want to consider
looking at the uniform rules. The Anchorage assembly deals with
conflicts of interest through its own internal rules, which
seems to work well. The discussion needs to continue.
SENATOR GREEN asked if for an example of someone being
conflicted from a vote.
SENATOR BUNDE asked if a three-quarters vote would be better
than the unanimous consent as a middle ground.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said members get cut off when they discuss why
they have a conflict. Maybe they should be in the public record.
SENATOR FRENCH said this is a difficult and fascinating issue -
ethically, politically, and philosophically. "We all know that
something has to happen." He suggested looking at examples in
other states where it works. Perhaps it only happens every four
or five years. Apparently the other states can get their work
done with some rule that prevents voting in some circumstances.
It seems like the Alaska legislature works, but it also seems
like a dinosaur. "We need to be open to the idea that there are
methods out there for dealing with what may be a circumstance
which is far more rare than most of us perceive."
10:18:50 AM
SENATOR STEVENS said the public knows where a politician stands
when elected. Citizens know what they are getting and want their
elected representatives to vote.
MS. SYDEMAN said there are many facets to the debate. The
committee could establish a small task force.
SENATOR BUNDE noted the disenfranchisement of the citizens who
elected someone who won't vote.
CHAIR MCGUIRE set aside SCR 12 as well as SB 203.
10:21:37 AM
MS. SYDEMAN said she has a separate presentation for SB 203. It
makes changes to the statute governing conflicts of interest.
CHAIR MCGUIRE set SCR 12 and SB 203 aside.
The committee took a brief at-ease at 10:22:21 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|