Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/05/1996 01:30 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SJR 31 VOTER APPROVAL:AK STATEHOOD ACT AMENDMENT
SENATOR DRUE PEARCE, sponsor of SJR 31, gave the following history
and synopsis of the legislation. The statehood compact, as entered
into by the people of the State of Alaska, is an agreement that
outlines our relationship with the federal government. The
provisions within the agreement were designed to assure Alaskans
that their rights under statehood are protected. Constituent
concern about the state's role in amending the statehood compact
has been expressed. Currently there is no constitutional guidance
as to the proper process Alaskans should use to amend the compace.
The Legislature passed AS 01.10.110 which allows, by statute, the
Legislature to amend the Compact unilaterally, without bringing any
proposed changes to a vote of the people. This issue has become
very sensitive as the debate about opening ANWR to oil and gas
development continues before Congress. The congressional
legislation would give the State 50 percent of the mineral
royalties. The question as to what royalty share Alaskans will
accept should be decided on its merits, and should be taken to the
people of the state. It would be more appropriate to answer the
fundamental question of how changes should be addressed, by placing
the question on the November ballot. A mechanism needs to be
created by which Alaskans can accept changes to the statehood
compact because other issues will arise in the future. SJR 31 is
offered as a solution to the problem. She materials contained in
committee members' packets which include Charles Cole's article in
the Wall Street Journal regarding the lawsuit filed in 1993 against
the federal government for breach of the Alaska statehood compact,
a legislative update by Attorney General Botelho (#22). She noted
the final brief was filed by the United States in November, and
oral arguments should begin soon.
SENATOR TAYLOR questioned whether the wording of the amendment
would require the legislature to affirmatively act on something
before the people would be asked to ratify that action. He asked
if the question of whether to split the royalties 50-50 or 90-10
would be up to the people themselves, and whether the legislature
would merely be supplying the vehicle for public action. SENATOR
PEARCE replied that providing the vehicle means the Legislature has
to affirmatively pass a resolution to put the question on the
ballot, which is the only way to get to the ballot.
Number 238
SENATOR TAYLOR thought SJR 31 might go beyond that because the
phrase, "A law, enacted by the legislature, giving the approval of
the State to an amendment of the Act...," would mean that the
Legislature has voted affirmatively to approve, in this example,
the 50-50 split. That split would then be ratified by the people.
He suggested having the legislature pose the question of approval
to the people. SENATOR PEARCE felt any legislature that puts a
compact question on the ballot would do so only if the majority of
legislators approve of it, however she would not be opposed to
changing that language. She stated her goal is to get the question
to the people.
Number 343
SENATOR ADAMS disagreed with Senator Taylor's opinion of the
language. Under changes made in 1976 legislation, any legislature
is permitted to take action on an activity that involves the
royalty split of 50-50 versus 90-10. SENATOR ADAMS felt the
committee should review the legal opinion, since the 50-50
provision in the NPRA was not challenged by any Alaskan. He added
that SB 200 provides for legislative action on ANWR, however is
only germane to ANWR.
SENATOR PEARCE commented she is personally uncomfortable placing
the ANWR split before the people on the ballot until Congress has
taken action. SJR 31 was drafted to fit the statutes so that it
follows the same legislative approval process and adds voter
ratification. AS 01.10.110 could be changed at a later date if the
ballot passes.
Number 369
SENATOR TAYLOR felt the question to be the vehicle by which the
change occurs: either through the legislative process or through
the legislature calling upon the people for approval. In the 1976
legislative vote the legislature assumed it had this power unto
itself.
SENATOR ADAMS asked if there are any other amendments being
considered to the statehood compact at this time. No one was aware
of any.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the provision under discussion is part of
the Mineral Leasing Act. SENATOR PEARCE replied affirmatively, and
explained the statehood compact provided that all laws of Congress
would effect Alaska as they did other states. Under the Mineral
Leasing Act other western states get 50 percent of the royalties
and an additional 40 percent is placed in a fund under the
Reclamation Act for distribution to states for reclamation
projects.
SENATOR TAYLOR stated it is his sense from the outset of this issue
that the appropriate way to find authority for the type of
amendment being contemplated is to return to the people who gave
their consent to be governed in this fashion originally. There was
a significant debate on the issue of statehood itself and because
the issues debated were of such magnitude it is important they be
revisited. One of those serious provisions is being changed in
Congress unilaterally at this time. The Governor's decision to not
sue on behalf of the people for the violation of the statehood
compact was disturbing since the Governor put himself in the
position of being sued for failing to protect Alaska's
Constitution. Senator Taylor urged the Governor to bring the issue
to the people for decision, and was informed by the Attorney
General of the 1976 legislation giving that power to the
legislature alone. Senator Taylor believes, if challenged, that
argument would fail, on the same basis that the legislature's
attempts to further define and amend the constitutional budget
reserve by legislative action failed before the court because the
legislature does not have the power to redefine a constitutional
amendment. He repeated his concern about the manner in which the
vehicle created in SJR 31 brings a vote to the people. The true
debate is whether the legislature will make the decisions about
amending the statehood compact, or whether those decisions will be
placed before the people that consented to be governed in this way
in the first place.
Number 425
SENATOR PEARCE explained that there is a basic misunderstanding in
Washington, D.C. about the compact lawsuit before the court. The
state has already sued on 90-10. The Governor has said that if
Congress passed 50-50, he would drop that portion of the lawsuit.
To date, the Administration has not done so. She added that
conversely, Alaskans may want to change the compact themselves, at
some point in time. In such a case, Alaska would move first and
then ask Congress to approve the action. She did not foresee the
legislature taking a position on an Act and placing it before the
voters.
SENATOR TAYLOR stated to get it from us to them, some would argue
that the legislature would unilaterally be able to speak for the
people. Conversely, it is conceivable that the state could tell
Congress it wants a 95-5 split. SENATOR PEARCE felt that requiring
both legislative approval and voter ratification would eliminate
that problem. SENATOR TAYLOR stated the committee will have to
take a serious look at the attorney generals' opinions that have
been rendered over the last several years, as well as the 1976 law.
SENATOR PEARCE commented that the actions taken on NPRA are the
weak link in the statehood compact lawsuit, if one exists.
DAVID BATTENBERG, representing the Northern Alaska Environmental
Center in Fairbanks, testified in support of voter ratification of
amendments to the statehood compact, regardless of whether the
amendment pertains to ANWR. He commended Senator Pearce for her
work on SJR 31.
SENATOR TAYLOR announced the committee would hold a worksession on
SJR 31 next week, and hopefully move it from committee at that
time.
SENATOR ADAMS asked that the committee request a legal opinion on
the legislation passed in 1976 in regard to the statehood compact.
SENATOR TAYLOR agreed to do so.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|