Legislature(1995 - 1996)
01/17/1996 01:15 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HJR 2 - UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE/SESSION LIMIT Number 368 CHAIRMAN PORTER announced the next order of business would be HJR 2, Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to redistricting and to the length of a regular session, and establishing a unicameral legislature; and providing for an effective date for each amendment. He added that the bill had been discussed during the interim. Number 448 REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE made a motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HJR 2. Hearing no objection, it was so ordered. Number 485 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN, sponsor of the resolution, opened his remarks by stating that the CS was a result of an interim hearing which suggests some small suggestive changes. He proposed outlining a few points he felt were important for discussion. Unicameral government is not a new concept. This system consists of only one house, therefore a bill does not have to move through an additional house. This eliminates the bill's movement through less committee hearings as well. This could also affect the period of time the legislature meets. Nebraska adopted the unicameral system during the depression as a cost-cutting measure. Because of it's success, the State of Nebraska has kept this system in place ever since. Most states mimic the federal government system in the spirit of equal representation. REPRESENTATIVE GREEEN added that the State of Alaska, in 1976, proposed the unicameral system as an amendment to the constitution, but the legislature turned it down even though it was the will of the people. He pointed out that it's a misconception to think that this system eliminates jobs for legislators. He quoted Dr. Robert Sittig as background, "The legislature itself is the proscribed starting place for constitutional amendments, however, legislators are disinclined to approve proposals which would alter substantially the body in which they serve." Number 825 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked for clarification concerning this reduction misconception. It was his understanding that there would be none. Number 841 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN responded that Representative Bunde was absolutely right. HJR 2 calls for the existing sixty legislators and the state would be divided into sixty different units. Within these units each representative or senator would be responsible to their electorate directly. Number 850 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked how many constituents would be comprised in a district. Number 896 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN answered 9,000 generally as a number. He pointed out that this was far less than some of the larger states and greater compared to places like Wyoming. A poll taken within the State of Nebraska reflected that it's citizens are very to wildly supportive of the unicameral system. The Nebraska members of the legislature feel it's a more efficient, less contentious, and a more responsive tool to the constituency. Number 1073 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked if there had been an informal polling of the Alaska legislature undertaken. Number 1099 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN responded that he hoped as the bill moved through committee the concept would gain support. He envisioned that this concept would pass the house, but he didn't know if the senate would go along with it. Representative Green added that a unicameral system is a cost saving measure. Number 1148 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked about the impacts this system would have on staff, the local economy effects, et cetera. Number 1161 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN answered yes, there would be various impacts. The length of the legislative session would probably be shortened, but the number of legislators would not change and they'd still need staff. Whether they would retain the same amount of staff or a compromise amount, Representative Green supposed that there would be some cost savings in this area. If the legislative session was shortened, Representative Green said staff might be increased since legislation would be moving through one house at a greater speed. A lot of frivolous legislation would fall by the way-side. Number 1228 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked if this change would mean some members of the legislature would not be seated on a committee. Number 1250 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stressed that because so many of the legislators are on so many committees now, they could cut back their membership and do a better job of serving on one or two committees, rather than four or five committees at one time. He felt as though there was enough committee work to go around. Number 1326 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN outlined his suggested amendment to the HJR 2 legislation. He felt as though the unicameral system was a great idea. If the proposed legislation was to be introduced through a constitutional amendment, he felt as though they should try to solve as many of the problems that currently exist with the formation of the legislature as possible. He proceeded to outline what he saw as a problem with deciding legislator's salaries. Because legislators are required to set their own salaries, they suffer severe criticism anytime an increase is suggested. This has become a major political football. He generally outlined how these legislative salaries have fluctuated over the years. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said a committee now exists, which sets salary policy and recommends proper compensation for legislators. They assess the legislative work load and look at comparable salaries in order to make recommendations, but the legislature doesn't usually act on these suggestions because of the perceived conflict. Representative Finkelstein suggested the formulation of a constitutional amendment which allows for a citizen's committee much like the one that exists now. When recommendations are made they would go into effect automatically, unless the legislature overrides them. This system would eliminate the issue of what and how the assembly members get paid. Although this amendment is not integral to a unicameral legislature, Representative Finkelstein feels as though it's an issue that will haunt future legislators who are forced into the position of approving their own salaries. With that, Representative Finkelstein asked to move the amendment. Number 1541 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for the purposes of discussion. Assuming that there isn't any legal problem with this amendment, Representative Green submitted that at line seven, of paragraph b, "it may prevent," he suggested changing the tenor of the sentence to say, "a proposed change is considered disapproved unless acted on by a resolution concurred in by at least a majority of the senate members within 45 days after it is presented." Number 1614 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN clarified that in the event a proposal wasn't accepted, then the status quo would stay in effect. Representative Green said yes. Representative Finkelstein reiterated that the concept of this amendment was that the legislature would turn over the decision of compensation to an impartial committee. If the legislature took no action and salaries were automatically generated, the committee's proposal to stand goes to the heart of this proposal. Number 1721 CHAIRMAN PORTER then welcomed Dr. Robert Sittig and Patrick O'Donnell from the State of Nebraska, who were both standing by on teleconference, to testify about the unicameral concept. Number 1744 DR. ROBERT SITTIG, Professor of Political Science, University of Nebraska, spoke first with a factual outline of how the Nebraska Legislature is configured. There are 49 seats, four year staggered terms, all members are called senators, and are paid 12,000 dollars per session. The session lengths run 60 days one year, 90 the other. The state recently adopted a two year budget cycle. The members are non-partisan which means the members are nominated and elected without an identification on the ballot. The Lieutenant Governor presides over the Legislature. To accommodate outsiders, there are mandatory public hearings on all bills by the committees. Time constraints to enact a bill are enforced. There are very few related officer positions. The opportunity for the media to attend closed door proceedings of the standing committees during mark up proceedings exists. Number 1820 DR. SITTIG then gave an overview of the advantages to the unicameral system. The Nebraska legislature is a small body, which adds to public accessibility. This also adds to the legislature's accountability. The members appreciate this format because it's unstructured and simple. This maximizes the impact that each of the members has in the legislative process. In addition, the committees are more accommodating which aids to moving legislation through the system. The negatives to this system is that it's becoming more centralized and more complicated. This decreases public input. The non-partisan factor of the Nebraska Legislature has caused more consternation than anything else. It leads to less candidate competition in the nominating and electing process. This also contributes to less public awareness and involvement than there would be if the system was partisan. The chief executive officers seem less engaged and distant from the policy making process. It's almost impossible for non-urban legislators to spend a career in the legislature. The average amount of service by a legislator is between only five or six years. Participation has been flat over the decade. Generally, service in the legislature is not attractive. Number 1943 DR. SITTIG then outlined a program Nebraska has initiated which allows for a rotation of leaders after serving longer than one year. This helps with stability. Even though Nebraska has a non- partisan system, the governor appoints members to committees who are actually partisan. Because there are a lot of vacancies on committees, the governor appoints in many instances, four or five individuals of choice. Even though the system is non-partisan, Republicans and Democrats will square off on the floor in house debates or in campaigns. Nebraska legislators are not rewarded for their diligent service and that puts a damper on the process. Number 2026 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN pointed out that the negatives Dr. Sittig outlined were more related to Nebraska's non-partisanship structure. If a bi-partisanship was maintained, would that make a difference? Number 2048 DR. SITTIG thought that it would add to more recruitment of candidates. He thought the public would identify more strongly with party affiliation. Number 2087 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if Nebraska's legislature has term limits and Dr. Sittig responded no, but that this question was in litigation now. Representative Green then asked how non- partisanship affects the structuring of legislative committees. Number 2127 DR. SITTIG responded that anyone can run for any leadership position, including committees. A person can nominate themselves. The votes are conducted secretly. If anyone runs for a committee they usually have some experience regarding that committee's subject matter jurisdiction. Number 2172 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked if the position of Lieutenant Governor in Nebraska was non-partisan and if so, was there a presiding officer with a defacto influence over the legislature as well? Number 2184 DR. SITTIG responded that the Lieutenant Governor is non-partisan and doesn't always preside over the house. Sometimes they will, but the Speaker of the House or others will do so as well. Number 2225 PATRICK O'DONNELL, Clerk of the Legislature, Nebraska State Legislature, testified to a few points Dr. Sittig made. He felt as though the members of the legislature would resist change to a partisan system. The Nebraska Legislature does not caucus per se and there are no partisan caucuses. The legislature's leadership is voted on by secret ballot on the opening day of session. Presently there are 26 non-partisan Republicans and 22 non-partisan Democrats. The speaker is a Democrat and half of the committee chairs are Democrat. The Lieutenant Governor's work is tolerated, but they have very little influence. Often times, if there's a controversial bill before the house, the Lieutenant Governor is encouraged not to attend. In regards to how legislation moves through the unicameral house, there are four readings of each bill. The fourth reading is designed as a checks and balance. It allows the bill to be debated on two separate occasions. The process is fairly decentralized. The speaker is somewhat limited in their authority. They have the ability to set the daily agenda, but any member has the ability to offer amendments and there's no limitation on the length of debate. Number 2461 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. O'Donnell what types of problems Alaska could anticipate in their change to a unicameral system. Number 2473 MR. O'DONNELL couldn't say specifically since he hadn't seen the Alaskan proposal. He thought there would be some reservations if the plan called for a reduction of legislators. Mr. O'DONNELL added that if a special session of the Nebraska legislature was convened they're required to meet a minimum of seven legislative days. Other than mechanical, the change-over to a unicameral system may not affect how legislation is enacted. TAPE 96-1, SIDE B Number 077 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked if caucuses did grow out the non- partisan system regardless of like-minded people establishing agendas. Number 101 MR. O'DONNELL responded by saying that it does happen informally and not as often as someone would think. The ebbs and flows of coalitions change rather quickly. Usually when caucuses do form they're issue related rather than agenda specific. Number 144 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if there were any state statutes or legislative rules which limit the ability of caucuses having confidential conversations. Number 148 MR. O'DONNELL said no, but Nebraska does have an open meetings law. People gathering in caucuses don't take action per se and these are not considered meetings of the legislature in any meaning of the term. Dr. Sittig pointed out that Nebraska has regional caucuses to accommodate and facilitate assignment of committees. Committees are formed along geographical lines. Number 207 CHAIRMAN PORTER then asked if the "mark-up" process as mentioned earlier, wasn't the process of putting the final touches on a bill out of the full session before it's presented for the full body's consideration. Would this be the same as an Alaska caucus situation? Number 216 MR. O'DONNELL responded by saying bills are referred out to their standing committees based on subject matter jurisdiction. The committee then conducts their public hearing and has the ability to modify proposals in any way deemed appropriate. This is the process of mark-up. Often times when a bill reaches the floor the first thing considered are the amendments proposed by the committee. Bills can also be amended on the floor. Number 252 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked who assigns the sequence of committee referrals and whether there is a sequence a bill goes through before it gets to the house, rather than it being worked through two committees at one time such as in Alaska. Number 272 MR. O'DONNELL responded. Nebraska has a management committee consisting of regional representatives, the speaker of the house, and a chairman and vice-chairman who are elected on the floor by secret ballot. It is a nine member committee and they're responsible for assigning the different pieces of legislation to the appropriate committee. Number 315 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the problem of Nebraska's high rate of turnover and asked how this has affected the legislature's activities. Number 341 MR. O'DONNELL answered yes, this does affect the legislature. There are situations where they're forced to reinvent the wheel, especially in their rules discussions revolving around process orientation. The floor is affected as well. Members who have not been exposed to particular issues have to be re-educated. It takes time to get people up to speed. Dr. Sittig agreed. Turn over is very rapid in the lower ranks. Number 415 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if this turn over might not improve if a bi-partisan system was installed. Number 427 MR. O'DONNELL said he did not honestly know. Dr. Sittig didn't think it would make that much of a difference, although he felt the political party vehicle does provide a bit more opportunity for advancement. Number 466 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN then continued his discussion regarding the proposed amendment to HJR 2. He reiterated what he said about the legislature's requirement to approve their own compensation, which is an untenable situation. He pointed out that to require the legislature to act on a salary committee's recommendation would not the change the status quo. Number 550 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said he understood what Representative Finkelstein was trying to achieve, but he also recalled a situation in Congress where a pay raise was to take effect unless the Congress voted it down. They were taken to task by the public. Representative Bunde was concerned that the Alaska Legislature might be damned if they did and damned if they didn't. The concept of a commission making a salary recommendation and the legislature being required to endorses it, was a compromise he could live with. Number 608 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN voiced his concern about this commission being appointed by the governor. He used a hypothetical situation where there's a governor of one party and a legislature of another. If the governor suggested a percentage decrease and the legislature didn't go along with that, the legislature would look bad. Number 661 CHAIRMAN PORTER spoke to the amendment and said that he agreed with Representative Finkelstein's suggestion the legislature should not vote on their salary increases, because that would put the issue right back at square one. Regardless of this, Chairman Porter said he couldn't support the amendment because it would cloud the issue of establishing a unicameral legislature. Number 708 REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS appreciated what Chairman Porter said, but felt that if this issue wasn't addressed now, it would be too hard to form a commission such as this one at a later time. She said this commission concept works well in Anchorage. A commission such as the one suggested sets the salaries for the Anchorage assembly and if the assembly doesn't take any related action, the suggested salaries automatically go into effect. The public never comes down on the commission for the amount of salary suggested. Number 753 CHAIRMAN PORTER, moving onto a different subject, agreed that establishing a non-partisan system in Alaska would be ideal. It would be easier to be a legislator in this type of environment. The Alaskan legislature would not necessarily become a non-partisan system as a result of enacting unicameral legislation. This would become a constitutional issue. Number 820 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN felt as though it would be very unlikely that the governor would penalize the legislature in the way suggested by Representative Green. This type of situation rarely happens if ever because the legislature appropriates monies to the governmental administration. Once this type of feud is undertaken, it would only get worse. Number 937 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said he is generally supportive of the amendment, but is hesitant to designate a single person who in turn appoints all the commission's members. He added that he would be interested in seeing an amendment which addresses this salary appropriations concern further through the legislative committee process. Number 950 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked for an amendment roll call. Voting for the amendment were Representatives Davis and Finkelstein. Voting against the amendment were Representatives Bunde, Green and Porter. Representatives Toohey and Vezey were not present. Chairman Porter declared that the amendment had failed. Number 990 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked the committee to then consider HJR 2. Number 996 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS asked a question of the sponsor, Joe Green regarding HJR 2. It was her understanding while listening to the testimony from Nebraska that the reasons why the unicameral system was so successful had more to do with the fact that their form of government was non-partisan. Number 1045 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN added that this was not what he heard. The disadvantages of the unicameral legislature outlined had more to do with the system being non-partisan. Representative Green then re- defined what these already discussed disadvantages were. Number 1006 CHAIRMAN PORTER understood from the non-partisan discussion that the legislators appreciate this system as it is established. Both witnesses thought the system would be better served with more public involvement and more tenure for the legislators under a partisan partnership. Number 1137 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS added that the witnesses said if the system was partisan this might allow legislators to move to higher offices. Her impression of the Alaska legislature is that their members don't move up respectively in it's bi-partisan system either. Number 1166 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE stated that he couldn't imagine this unicameral system proposal could be implemented under a non- partisan banner. He stated that change is hard for people. He also asked the sponsor if he envisioned that the Lieutenant Governor would preside over the Alaska legislature within this unicameral framework. Chairman Porter first recognized the presence of Representative Vezey. Number 1240 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN thought that a presiding Lieutenant Governor would not be part of the proposed legislation. He felt this would ensure the separation of power. Number 1281 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE thought the advantages of establishing a unicameral system was the overall efficiency, including the establishment of smaller constituencies to serve. He then made a motion to move HJR 2 from the Judiciary Committee with individual recommendations. Number 1328 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if there were any objections. Hearing none, HJR 2 was moved out of committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|