Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
03/01/2006 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR20 | |
| SB216 | |
| SB222 | |
| SB284 | |
| SB301 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 252 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 301 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 249 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SJR 20 | ||
| = | SB 216 | ||
| = | SB 222 | ||
| = | SB 284 | ||
SJR 20-CONST. AM: BENEFITS & MARRIAGE
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced SJR 20 to be up for consideration.
8:44:35 AM
LIZ BOARIO informed the committee that she was testifying for
herself as well as her husband. She echoed a remark from
previous testimony that SJR 20 was discriminatory and divisive.
She said it dishonors the hallmarks of Alaska and of the United
States Constitution, specifically the Equal Protection Clause.
She has not heard serious argument that the resolution is not
harmful. Instead what she is hearing is the mantra regarding the
people's will, and history is full of tragic examples of
majority manipulation. She suggested there were plenty of
serious issues that need attention without people having to
create new ones where none exist. She said she is deeply
saddened to witness what she saw as a polite charade.
Constitutional amendments are historically used to make things
better for the people and SJR 20 would hurt talented people who
work for the betterment of all Alaskans.
8:48:02 AM
DOUG VEIT testified in opposition to SJR 20. He said it was
patently discriminatory; it singles out a particular class of
people and systematically deprives them of economic and social
resources simply because of their membership in the class. He
suggested there were specific reasons for the separation of
church and state. He said he has not heard any testimony of
support for the resolution that passes the logic test.
8:51:23 AM
BELINDA SESSIONS testified in opposition to SJR 20 and said she
spoke for her partner as well. She said the Alaska State
Constitution should guarantee basic rights, not take them away.
She described her 23-year lesbian relationship and said they
gladly pay taxes, attend church, volunteer in the community, and
contribute monetarily to organizations that help the needy. If
the Legislature succeeds in overturning the Alaska Supreme
Court, Alaska will be guilty of discrimination by giving some
employees better benefits packages than others. It is an
employment issue and not a marriage issue, she stated.
8:53:47 AM
MS. SESSIONS commented that equitable benefits packages would
increase the ability of the schools to recruit and retain
teachers. She urged the committee to reject the resolution.
8:54:58 AM
TAMMY DAVIS testified in opposition to SJR 20. She noted
previous testimony in opposition to the resolution has been
wrought with thoughtful, heartfelt, and intelligent comments. It
is her opinion that SJR 20 mandates unequal compensation for
equal work for individuals who choose domestic partnership as an
alternative to church or state-sanctioned union as well as those
who are not able by law to come into a legally binding marriage.
She urged the committee to support the civil liberties of all
Alaskan citizens and reject the resolution.
8:56:46 am
MO MCBRIDE testified in opposition to SJR 20. She said she is
not in one of the groups affected by the issue but feels very
strongly that the Alaska State Constitution was being
threatened. She suggested committee members transpose another
group of people into the resolution, such as Hispanics, and see
whether that seemed like a fair resolution. She said adding
exclusionary language to the Constitution is against what the
creators of the document intended. She said the Preamble states
very clearly they wanted to transmit to succeeding generations
the heritage of political, civil, and religious liberty. They
reiterated it again in the inherent rights section of Article 1.
She strongly urged the committee to reject the resolution.
8:59:38 AM
KATHY SWEENEY testified in opposition to SJR 20. She said as a
licensed healthcare official she found it unfathomable that
elected officials were writing legislation that would deny
healthcare to citizens of Alaska. She considered the irony that
recently United States Senator Lisa Murkowski addressed members
of the committee along with the entire Legislative body and
encouraged them to work towards improving healthcare for all
Alaskans.
Other legislative committees are working diligently to make
Alaska an attractive state for young professionals to come and
fulfill employment roles, she stated. SJR 20 works against that
goal.
MS. SWEENEY noted that more than 99 percent of people who
testified have opposition to the resolution. Members of the
committee have suggested the issue was one of much contention
yet she saw no evidence of it. She said abortion was a
contentious issue and if that were the issue before the
committee there would be much heated debate on both sides, yet
testimony on SJR 20 was one-sided.
9:04:02 AM
MS. SWEENEY suggested that when it comes to politics, the
majority of Americans are paralyzed by apathy and suggested it
was due to elected officials not listening to their
constituents.
CHAIR SEEKINS closed public testimony.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a brief recess at 9:05:48 AM.
9:10:25 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked for discussion among committee members.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT commented the issue was difficult and
should not be taken lightly. It would require a super majority
to pass the Senate since it would be an amendment to the Alaska
State Constitution. He said the debate had been good and the
language of SJR 20 would be modified throughout the process and
so he moved SJR 20 out of committee with individual
recommendations.
SENATOR FRENCH objected. He said the measure was brought in
response to a unanimous Alaska Supreme Court decision that was
penned by one of the more conservative members of the court. The
proposal seeks to overturn that decision. The Court found that
the state could not deny health benefits to long-term partners
of its gay employees consistent with the Equal Protection
Clause. He said this was a clear message of equal pay for equal
work. He said he could not let SJR 20 go forward because it
chips away at the Equal Protection Clause of the Alaska State
Constitution. He said that was more than he could bear and
maintained his objection.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a brief recess at 9:13:22 AM.
9:13:35 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS brought the committee meeting back to order and
asked for further discussion.
SENATOR THERRIAULT stated a three-two vote out of committee did
not amount to a two-thirds vote and he did not know whether the
measure would see a two-thirds vote on the Senate Floor. He
contended legislators continually hear testimony on decisions
that the Court makes and said it is the way the system is
designed. He insisted that suggesting an amendment to the
Constitution could not be unconstitutional and that the voters
should be trusted to do the right thing. He said since voters in
his district voted 4-1 in favor of the Marriage Amendment, SJR
20 deserved further discussion and should not be halted in the
first committee of referral.
9:15:49 AM
SENATOR GUESS suggested SJR 20 was not what people were looking
for. She expressed sadness that Alaskans have had to come
forward and speak about their sexuality in front of camera and
that the Legislature was going to continue that process by
moving the resolution out of committee. She said the issue was
about asking the majority to vote on minority rights and it is
wrong and discriminatory. She said she would vote to keep the
resolution in committee to die and voiced support for letting
Alaska move forward.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he interpreted the Alaska Supreme Court
opinion to mean that the 1998 Marriage Amendment did not speak
to the issue. He said footnote 38 says the Court recognized the
benefit programs became discriminatory only after the electorate
adopted the Marriage Amendment in 1998. The courts have said
that the people have forced the state to treat same-sex couples
as though they were married even though they are not. The state
needs to ask the people whether that was their intent. He said
it was the right of the people to decide whether they accept the
Alaska Supreme Court ruling.
9:19:09 AM
Roll call proved SJR 20 passed out of committee on a 3-2 vote
with Senators Huggins, Therriault, and Seekins voting yea; and
Senators French and Guess voting nay.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|