Legislature(2015 - 2016)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/03/2016 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| Confirmation Hearings | |
| SB157 | |
| SJR15 | |
| SCR4 | |
| HB93 | |
| Confirmation Hearings | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 93 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SCR 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 157 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SJR 15-CALL FOR US COUNTERMAND CONVENTION
1:55:21 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of SJR 15.
1:55:47 PM
SENATOR BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska,
sponsor of SJR 15, introduced himself.
1:56:04 PM
DANIEL GEORGE, Staff, Senator Bill Stoltze, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, introduced himself and summarized
the reason the committee was hearing both SJR 15 and SCR 4
today. He suggested starting with SJR 15.
SENATOR STOLTZE explained that SJR 15 is a vehicle to address
the issue of federal overreach. He opined that it empowers
states with the power that the founders envisioned when the
Republic was established.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked how many states have passed similar
legislation and how many are needed [to pursue a countermand
constitutional convention.]
SENATOR STOLTZE deferred to Mr. George.
1:58:56 PM
MR. GEORGE said he misplaced the list but there are a number of
supporting letters in the packets from states that have passed
or are considering similar legislation. Under Article V of the
Constitution of the United States, two-thirds of the states
would be required to propose a single-issue, countermand
amendment convention. The specific text is within the bills to
prevent any kind of runaway convention. Upon receipt of
applications from 34 state legislatures, Congress would call the
convention within 60 days. Once the convention is called,
specific initiatives to countermand specific federal actions,
statutes, or decisions could be proposed. Those would have to be
approved by three-fifths of the states.
SENATOR STOLTZE described the concept as simple. "It's providing
for the Tenth Amendment powers that the states should have and
that have been eroded through a lot of executive fiat by both
democratic and Republican presidents." He added that this is a
tool for states that has a high threshold but, "I don't think
it's a weapon that'll be drawn except in self-defense by the
states."
CHAIR MCGUIRE commented that most of the committee has signed on
as co-sponsors.
SENATOR STOLTZE stressed the importance have the motivations for
the legislation a matter of public record. Many interested
Alaskans have been involved but it's difficult to get people to
testify during the work day, he said.
CHAIR MCGUIRE noted that Mike Coons signed up to testify on both
pieces of legislation.
2:03:03 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI clarified that he is not a co-sponsor and
is very concerned that this process would allow states to
overturn decisions of the judicial branch of government. "I
think there have been periods of time where the majority of the
people would have willingly kept very - what we can look back
now, controversial decisions by the Supreme Court. Racial
segregation as an example." The courts are supposed to be an
unbiased arbiter of the law and this gives state legislatures
the ability to overturn judicial decisions. "It concerns me
greatly that you have legislative branches interceding in the
judicial branch," he said.
SENATOR STOLTZE offered his belief that many people in the state
feel the converse about a trespass by the courts on many state
issues.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said Senator Wielechowski brings up a valid
argument and it's the challenge to the countermand movement. On
the other hand, the constitution is supposed to be a living and
breathing document that reflects social and political movements.
She said she believes that people that live in states and the
people that represent them are closest to how people are
feeling. "Some of those notions we may not like," but, "on the
other hand, the issue of states having more control over their
lands is huge." For example, it would be much easier for the
State of Alaska to solve its budget deficit if it owned more of
the land within the boundaries of the state. She also cited the
King Cove road as a searing example of how out of touch
Washington, D.C. is with life in Alaska.
She said both sides of this issue are valid, "but this notion is
appealing to me because I think that there is a point that our
forefathers envisioned that we would all collectively come back
together...and reflect on some of these things and decide
whether or not there is room for change."
2:08:38 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked who from Alaska would go to the
countermand amendment convention, and what happens until the
threshold number of states sign on.
MR. GEORGE explained that the procedures for who goes to the
convention from each state is outlined in SCR 4. It creates a
delegate credential committee, which would select the delegates.
He noted that under this bill, the delegate credential committee
would expire on the 1st day of the 30th legislature.
He clarified that the purpose of a countermand convention is to
countermand an action, not to create new law. They are specific
to an issue or decision that can garner the support of three-
fifths of the legislatures in the U.S. to ratify. Following that
approval, the measure is returned to Congress. "So there's a
lengthy process here, with checks," he said.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked how likely it is that this will actually
take place.
2:12:22 PM
SENATOR STOLTZE replied it will be a long journey. Even after
the first step it will be more difficult than getting five
people on the Supreme Court to change a law in the Constitution,
he said.
MR. GEORGE added that this is different than the Electoral
College in that these delegates are specifically bound and can
be removed for cause.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if he reviewed the discussions of the
framers of the Constitution when forming this option, because
the process of making laws wasn't intended to be easy. "What
were the values being talked about?"
2:14:25 PM
MR. GEORGE replied it's important to remember that Article V was
part of the U.S. Constitution from the start. He said the U.S
Constitution has been amended 27 times so it's an avenue for the
people to effect the working of their government. He
acknowledged that the process for the countermand amendment
convention is somewhat uncharted so some of it is theoretical in
nature.
2:15:02 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked, "Is there anyone in the room that wouldn't
want to attend if you knew there was an opportunity to reflect
on issues like this?" She expressed appreciation for the
questions from Senator Wielechowski and Senator Costello and
opined that this is a conversation worth considering.
2:17:06 PM
SENATOR COGHILL said it's a very high hurdle to get 34 states to
agree on any issue. He disagreed with the comparison to the
Supreme Court and "hair on fire" moment for the people to
coalesce around a single idea. However, it's important to have
the tool in place and this lays out the rules. "This is using
Article V the way it was intended," he said.
CHAIR MCGUIRE maintained that it was the states that led the
home-grown idea that slaves should be emancipated; it wasn't an
issue of the federal government. She also commented on the
initiative and referendum process. It was very controversial in
1995 but the result is that the fabric of society has changed in
remarkable and progressive ways. "It's not any more radical than
this," she concluded.
2:22:17 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he appreciates the sentiments and the
efforts of the sponsor, but the history of nullification in this
country is long and ugly. This Republic was set up to protect
people and the Supreme Court often issues unpopular opinions
various groups. While some good may come out of the proposed
process, it's easy to envision a different outcome when the
pendulum swings, he said and cited the Second Amendment and Roe
v. Wade. He closed emphasizing that this is not the best
approach for the state or the country to take; there are other
established means.
2:23:42 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE held SJR 15 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Resume-Gary J Turner 2016.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
|
| Turner Bio Updated Nov 2015.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
|
| CSHB 93.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
HB 93 |
| fiscalNote DOA CSHB 93.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
HB 93 |
| fiscalNote DOC CSHB 93.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
HB 93 |
| Sectional Analysis CSHB 93.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
HB 93 |
| Conner Thomas Resume.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
|
| CS SCR 4.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
|
| CS SJR 15.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
|
| fiscalNote SCR 4.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |
|
| fiscalNote SJR 15.pdf |
SJUD 2/3/2016 1:30:00 PM |