Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/31/2001 11:19 AM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 177 - CAMPAIGN FINANCE: CONTRIB/DISCLOS/GROUPS Number 0859 CHAIR ROKEBERG announced the next order of business, HOUSE BILL NO. 177, "An Act placing certain special interest organizations within the definition of 'group' for purposes of Alaska's campaign finance statutes; providing a contingent amendment to take effect in case subjecting these organizations to all of the statutory requirements pertaining to groups is held by a court to be unconstitutional; requiring certain organizations to disclose contributions made to them and expenditures made by them; requiring disclosure of the true source of campaign contributions; and providing for an effective date." [CSHB 177(STA) was before the committee.] [Because of their length, the amendments to CSHB 177(STA) that were discussed during the meeting are found at the end of the minutes for HB 177.] Number 0826 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he had two amendments to offer, which were being copied and distributed to members. CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that the committee had taken testimony in the public hearing of HB 177 [held on 3/30/01]. Number 0802 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ explained that Amendment 2 [which was discussed first] would make campaign finance laws apply to issues and initiatives, in addition to candidates. He added right upfront that that would be unconstitutional, but he pointed out that the fact that things have been unconstitutional has not barred the legislature from trying to set policy in other directions. He said that the reason it would be unconstitutional was because the [U.S.] Supreme Court said that there is nothing to be corrupted within an issue or initiative, unlike with a candidate who receives large sums of money from an individual and thereby becomes unduly swayed. Representative Berkowitz added that he thinks the reality of politics is such that issues and individuals associated with issues can be tainted by large sums of money coming to those issues. He posited that current law was unconstitutional, and one way to get the [U.S.] Supreme Court to revisit and reassess issues in light of new political realities is to "push the envelope" a little bit. He added that he thought the envelope should be pushed by saying rules that apply to individuals should also apply to issues. Number 0669 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES responded that she tended to agree in some ways with Representative Berkowitz on this issue, but she disagreed with the premise that the reason for having campaign finance reform and monetary limits was because a legislator's vote could be bought. She said that she believed the only issue addressed by campaign finance rules was the public's right to know. She said she agreed that with regard to issues and initiatives, the money that is spent getting the message out to the people is persuasive. And the more money spent on the message, the more persuasive it can be. Further, [the message] is not always a full picture of the issue. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES added that having said this, she tends to agree that wherever there is money involved in affecting policy in the state, either by law or by choice, the public has a right to know whose money is involved. She said that was the goal of HB 177. She added that she thinks now is not the time to do what Amendment 2 proposes because there is not sufficient time for discussion of this complicated issue. She noted that she would be willing to address that particular issue at some point because she believes that policy-making initiatives and issues are being bought and paid for without public awareness of the source of the funds. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ noted that in Alaska, a lot of time was spent worrying about the effect of "outside money," particularly on wildlife initiatives. He said that rather than limit who can bring forth certain types of initiatives, his antidote would be to ban outside money. With regard to outside money, an individual's campaign is limited to $3,000; he said he thought that something similar could be done with regard to initiatives. Number 0490 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she disagreed that that approach would be unconstitutional, so long as it was scheduled correctly. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ commented that he was not speaking against his own amendment but was instead saying that [the legislature] could still have a lot of discussion on the subject encompassed by it. He said he was using the opportunity presented by having campaign finance legislation before the committee to have some of this discussion. He added that he might offer an amendment during the House floor session that would specifically address outside money for initiatives and issues. Number 0440 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ made a motion to adopt Amendment 2, [22-LS0406\S.1, Kurtz, 3/30/01]. [Amendment 2 is provided at the end of the minutes on HB 177.] Number 0438 CHAIR ROKEBERG objected. He said that per the advice of committee counsel, he would find it troubling to vote for something that would be unconstitutional at this juncture. In addition, he said he thought the sponsor of HB 177 would be reluctant to accept Amendment 2 because it would broaden the scope, and it was not the sponsor's intent to speak to this issue. He added, however, that while he agreed with both Representative James and Representative Berkowitz that this was an issue worthy of discussion, the lateness of the hour precluded further discussion. Number 0365 A roll call vote was taken. Representative Berkowitz voted for Amendment 2. Representatives James, Coghill, Meyer, and Rokeberg voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 1-4. Number 0361 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, [22-LS0406\S.2, Kurtz, 3/31/01] [Amendment 1 is provided at the end of the minutes on HB 177.] Number 0359 CHAIR ROKEBERG objected. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ explained that Amendment 1 would increase the penalties for violators of campaign finance laws. CHAIR ROKEBERG disagreed with Amendment 1 based on the peculiar complexities of the [campaign finance] laws, which he said he thinks are in large part a barrier to candidate recruitment. [The campaign finance laws] are so easy to run afoul of because they are entirely too complex. In addition, he said he did not think the new electronic format was user-friendly whatsoever. The potential for making errors and not being in compliance with the law was overwhelming at this juncture. He added that if the whole context of the reporting requirements could be simplified, then he might be more willing to look at an increase in fines, and even increasing [violations] up to a felony level. But given the current flux of campaign finance laws, he said he thought it was inappropriate [to increase fines at this time]. He added, as an example, that current disclosure provisions subject a person to penalties if he or she, through an oversight, neglects to disclose financial losses from securities held in a personal portfolio. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES agreed that reporting requirements do pose a deterrent to running for office. Many first-time candidates violate campaign finance laws in ignorance; she added, though, that ignorance is no excuse because a candidate is required to read the entire campaign finance law. She said she did not have any pat answers on how to make the [disclosure provisions] less cumbersome and easier for people to understand, or, also, how to encourage other people to run for the legislature. She added that she would like to "open the door" in order to find people to serve [in the legislature]. Number 0110 REPRESENTATIVE MEYER added that due to the current stiff penalties, he had contacted the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) frequently during the course of his campaign, and that [Amendment 1] would make the situation worse because a person could potentially be a felon. He said he agreed that most people wouldn't even attempt to run for office [because of the complexity of current campaign finance laws], and if penalties are increased, then those who do run for office would be conferring with the APOC before every move. CHAIR ROKEBERG asked if Amendment 1 was an "incumbent- protection" amendment. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ responded that he did not think Amendment 1 put candidates at risk. He said what he had in mind were "operatives who know how to circumvent the system, and do so with little risk of any penalty." CHAIR ROKEBERG countered that by "casting the net" in the way that Amendment 1 was drafted, he took it to mean that everyone would be "underneath that umbrella." He asked Representative Berkowitz if this was correct. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ responded that yes, everyone would be under that umbrella, and he noted that he, too, called the APOC all the time to ask questions. TAPE 01-50, SIDE A Number 0001 CHAIR ROKEBERG commented that [new candidates] would not have the education and experience of reading the campaign finance laws year after year as [incumbents] have, and thus it would be a problem [for new candidates]. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ countered that as he said before, there are people out there who know how to go around the rules. CHAIR ROKEBERG said he was maintaining his objection to Amendment 1, and asked if Representative Berkowitz would withdraw Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he was maintaining his offer of Amendment 1. Number 0045 A roll call vote was taken. Representative Berkowitz voted for Amendment 1. Representatives Coghill, Meyer, James, and Rokeberg voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 1- 4. Number 0066 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES moved to report CSHB 177(STA) out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 177(STA) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee. AMENDMENTS The following amendments to CSHB 177(STA) were discussed during the hearing. Amendment 2 [22-LS0406\S.1, Kurtz, 3/30/01] (discussed first; not adopted) Page 1, line 2, following "statutes;": Insert "applying certain campaign finance restrictions to ballot propositions and questions;" Page 2, following line 5: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 3. AS 15.13.040(d) is amended to read: (d) Every individual, person, or group making a contribution or expenditure shall make a full report, upon a form prescribed by the commission, of (1) contributions made to a candidate or group and expenditures made on behalf of a candidate or group (A) as soon as the total contributions and expenditures to that candidate or group reaches $500 in a year; and (B) for all subsequent contributions and expenditures to that candidate or group in a year whenever the total contributions and expenditures to that candidate or group that have not been reported under this paragraph reaches $500; (2) [UNLESS EXEMPTED FROM REPORTING BY (h) OF THIS SECTION,] any expenditure whatsoever for advertising in newspapers or other periodicals, on radio, or on television; or, for the publication, distribution, or circulation of brochures, flyers, or other campaign material for any candidate or ballot proposition or question." Renumber the following bill section accordingly. Page 2, following line 30: Insert new bill sections to read: "* Sec. 5. AS 15.56.014(a) is amended to read: (a) A person commits the crime of campaign misconduct in the second degree if the person (1) knowingly circulates or has written, printed or circulated a letter, circular, or publication relating to an election, to a candidate at an election, or an election proposition or question without the name and address of the author appearing on its face; (2) [EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY AS 15.13.090(b),] knowingly prints or publishes an advertisement, billboard, placard, poster, handbill, paid-for television or radio announcement, or other communication intended to influence the election of a candidate or outcome of a ballot proposition or question without the words "paid for by" followed by the name and address of the candidate, group, or individual paying for the advertising or communication and, if a candidate or group, with the name of the campaign chair; (3) knowingly writes or prints and circulates, or has written, printed and circulated, a letter, circular, bill, placard, poster, or advertisement in a newspaper, on radio or television (A) containing false factual information relating to a candidate for an election; (B) that the person knows to be false; and (C) that would provoke a reasonable person under the circumstances to a breach of the peace or that a reasonable person would construe as damaging to the candidate's reputation for honesty, integrity, or the candidate's qualifications to serve if elected to office. * Sec. 6. AS 15.13.010(d), 15.13.040(h), 15.13.065(c), 15.13.084(1), 15.13.090(b), and 15.13.140 are repealed." Amendment 1 [22-LS0406\S.2, Kurtz, 3/31/01] (discussed last; not adopted) Page 1, line 1, following "Act": Insert "increasing the civil penalties and amending the criminal penalties for violation of Alaska's campaign finance statutes;" Page 2, following line 5: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 3. AS 15.13.390(a) is amended to read: (a) A person who fails to register when required by AS 15.13.050(a) or who fails to file a properly completed and certified report within the time required by AS 15.13.040(d) - (f), 15.13.060(b) - (d), 15.13.080(c), 15.13.110(a)(1), (3), or (4), (e), or (f) is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $100 [$50] a day for each day the delinquency continues as determined by the commission subject to right of appeal to the superior court. A person who fails to file a properly completed and certified report within the time required by AS 15.13.110(a)(2) or 15.13.110(b) is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $1000 [$500] a day for each day the delinquency continues as determined by the commission subject to right of appeal to the superior court. A person who violates a provision of this chapter, except a provision requiring registration or filing of a report within a time required as otherwise specified in this section, is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $100 [$50] a day for each day the violation continues as determined by the commission, subject to right of appeal to the superior court. An affidavit stating facts in mitigation may be submitted to the commission by a person against whom a civil penalty is assessed. However, the imposition of the penalties prescribed in this section or in AS 15.13.380 does not excuse that person from registering or filing reports required by this chapter." Renumber the following bill section accordingly. Page 2, following line 30: Insert new bill sections to read: "* Sec. 5. AS 15.56.012(c) is amended to read: (c) Campaign misconduct in the first degree is a class C felony [CLASS A MISDEMEANOR]. * Sec. 6. AS 15.56.014(c) is amended to read: (c) Campaign misconduct in the second degree is a class A [CLASS B] misdemeanor. * Sec. 7. AS 15.56.016(b) is amended to read: (b) Campaign misconduct in the third degree is a class B misdemeanor [VIOLATION]." [End of proposed amendments to CSHB 177(STA); CSHB 177(STA) was reported out of committee.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|