Legislature(2015 - 2016)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/24/2016 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 | |
| SB123 | |
| SB24 | |
| SJR19 | |
| SB180 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 180 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 19 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 123 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SJR 19-CALL FED. CONSTITUTIONAL CONV: TERM LIMITS
1:52:31 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of SJR 19.
1:53:14 PM
FORREST WOLFE, Staff, Senator Lesil McGuire, introduced SJR 19
speaking to the following sponsor statement:
SJR 19 begins a process under Article V of the U.S.
Constitution for application to Congress to call a
Convention of States to debate an amendment for term
limits for members of Congress.
As of February 2016, nearly 80% of Americans and 78%
of Alaskans have expressed bi-partisan support to
limiting the number of terms a person can serve in the
U.S. Congress.
SJR 19 is about respecting the will of the people and
fixing a broken system. In 1994 and 1996 the people of
Alaska voted to express their strong support in
imposing term limits. The 1994 voter initiative passed
with nearly 63% of the Alaska electorate, or 126,960
Alaskans, expressing the desire to limit terms of
congressional office holders. Twenty-two other states
also voted to limit congressional terms. The next
year, in [USTL vs. Thornton] the U.S. Supreme Court
ruled it unconstitutional for states to pass
individual state laws placing limits on the number of
terms a congressman could serve. The Court instead
ruled that a constitutional amendment would be
necessary. Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides
a means, other than directly through Congress, for the
states to propose adopting such an amendment.
Implementing term limits empowers the people by
allowing for people with new ideas and energy to
compete for office. Washington D.C. is broken and
bound by endless gridlock literally unable to respond
to the voters' wishes. One only needs to look at the
skyrocketing debt -- some $19 trillion - and
inefficient programs, to know that Congress is unable
to control spending and fix the country's problems.
Contrary to the Framer's intent to have a citizen
legislature that rotates regularly many of those in
Washington have grown apart from the very constituents
that sent them there.
SJR 19 will help end "business as usual" in Washington
D.C. and helps to put the people back in charge of
their government. Incumbents are heavily favored in
elections creating an uneven playing field for those
with fresh ideas to represent and serve.
1:54:52 PM
NICOLAS TOMBOULIDES, U.S. Term Limits (USTL), Washington, DC,
provided supporting information for SJR 19. He related that this
national non-profit organization was the appellant in the U.S.
Supreme Court case USTL vs. Thornton. USTL assisted 23 states to
place term limits on prospective members of the U.S. Congress
but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not impose
qualifications that are stricter than those outlined in the
Constitution. The silver lining is that this can be done under
Article V, he said.
He explained that Article V describes the process whereby the
Constitution may be amended. Thirty four states must pass
resolutions on a single subject calling for a convention. Once
that threshold is met, Congress is required to call a
convention. Each state appoints its delegates who would propose
an amendment to impose congressional term limits. This would be
ratified by the legislatures or conventions within 38 states.
MR. TOMBOULIDES reiterated support for the resolution opining
that Congress is practically and geographically removed from the
citizens of the U.S. He quoted a professor at U.C. Irvine to
support that position. He described the system as broken with
large, gerrymandered districts that encourage special interests
to step in and keep members in office for decades at a time. He
stressed the importance of creating an election system that
allows for fresh ideas and rebalances the system to make
Congress more accountable to the people.
MR. TOMBOULIDES concluded that the founders intended for Article
V to be used and there is no better time than now.
2:00:29 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked, assuming there is a convention and term
limits imposed, how this would affect the balance of power
between the three branches of government.
MR. TOMBOULIDES said he believes this would reinvigorate
Congress and enable the will of the people to place a check on
the executive branch because citizens would feel their voices
are being heard in congressional elections.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked the average number of years that
executive branch bureaucrats have served in their current
positions.
MR. TOMBOULIDES offered to follow up with the information.
SENATOR COGHILL asked who led on the opposite side of the issue
that resulted in USTL vs. Thornton.
2:02:55 PM
MR. TOMBOULIDES recalled that Arkansas Congressman Ray Thornton
challenged the state constitutional amendment. A lower court
ruled in his favor and USTL appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
It was a 5-4 decision USTL with Justice Thomas writing the
dissenting opinion.
SENATOR COGHILL commented that some might look at this as trying
to cut Alaska's senior Congressman off at the knees and his
perspective is that couldn't be farther from the truth. He
asked, assuming there is a convention and term limits imposed,
if this would be prospective.
MR. TOMBOULIDES said the delegates would make that decision, but
his organization tends to favor a prospective term limit.
Current members shouldn't be exempted forever, but they
shouldn't be thrown out of office immediately either, he said.
SENATOR COGHILL reiterated that he isn't interested in removing
the Alaska delegation then added that the effort may have worth
if two-thirds of the states agree.
He asked if continuous applications under Article V mount or
dissipate rapidly based on political whim.
MR. TOMBOULIDES said regional issues tend to die out, but when a
national issue garners enough support Congress tends to act
before the convention is convened. He named several amendments
in the Constitution that weren't done by an Article V
convention, but were pressured by one.
SENATOR COGHILL commented that there is a rich history of
America putting Congress under pressure.
2:09:03 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE asked how the court distinguished its reasoning
in the Thornton decision and the ruling in 1951 that allowed the
term limits of the presidency to be redefined.
MR. TOMBOULIDES explained that in 1951 Congress ratified the
22nd Amendment imposing a two-term limit on the office of
President, whereas in 1995 it was a U.S. Supreme Court ruling
regarding state statutes and state constitutional amendments.
The latter did not have the same force of law as the 22nd
Amendment, he said.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked, if term limits had been imposed on
representatives and senators, how many presidents would not have
gone from consecutive service in Congress and then on to the
presidency. She commented on the advantages of institutional
knowledge versus fresh ideas and asked if he'd thought about
weighing the opportunity cost when he discussed term limits.
MR. TOMBOULIDES said he'd follow up with the data, but their
research indicates that newer members are more skeptical of the
weight and power of bureaucracy. That being said, preserving
institutional knowledge is very important and the delegates will
have to work to strike the right balance, he said.
2:14:51 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE commented on the disconnect millennials feel
with their government and opined that it's good to move elected
officials through.
SENATOR COGHILL commented that this would force the question on
the voters and his interest stems from the low voter turnout.
2:20:00 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE opened public testimony.
2:20:43 PM
MIKE COONS, National Legislative Director, Citizen Initiatives,
Palmer, Alaska, raised concern with some of the language in the
first resolve on page 2 of SJR 19. He pointed out that there are
already several single issue Article V organizations that are
looking for a single amendment. Also, the Convention of States
came up with three broad subjects, one of which is term limits.
The COS concept on term limits is it would apply to Congress,
federal judges, and the Supreme Court, which means an amendment
for each office.
He suggested everyone get together and put forward applications
that are specific to a named amendment. In this case, a term
limit for Congress amendment so that is the only thing that
could be brought up. He also encouraged introducing a delegate
resolution that defines the convention and contains the specific
language of the amendment. He suggested looking at the language
in SJR 15 and changing the language in the first resolve to
something similar.
He also expressed concern with the second resolve because it
combines with the convention of the states version of term
limits that has passed in 5 states. His belief is that Congress
will deny that.
2:28:05 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE held SJR 19 in committee.