Legislature(2019 - 2020)GRUENBERG 120

02/05/2020 01:45 PM 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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Please Note Time Change --
+ HJR 15 CONST. AM: VOTES NEEDED FOR VETO OVERRIDE TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ HB 133 JUVENILES: JUSTICE,FACILITES,TREATMENT TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
        HJR 15-CONST. AM: VOTES NEEDED FOR VETO OVERRIDE                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:51:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the  first order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE  JOINT RESOLUTION  NO. 15,  Proposing an  amendment to  the                                                               
Constitution  of the  State of  Alaska relating  to actions  upon                                                               
veto.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:52:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE    JONATHAN     KREISS-TOMKINS,    Alaska    State                                                               
Legislature, as prime sponsor, introduced  HJR 15.  He introduced                                                               
his intern, Josiah Nash.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:52:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOSIAH  NASH,  Intern,  Representative  Jonathan  Kreiss-Tomkins,                                                               
Alaska  State   Legislature,  presented  HJR  15   on  behalf  of                                                               
Representative  Kreiss-Tomkins, prime  sponsor.   He stated  that                                                               
HJR 15 proposes  a constitutional amendment that  would lower the                                                               
veto vote  threshold for  appropriation bills  from three-fourths                                                               
of legislators,  which is  45 votes, to  two-thirds, which  is 40                                                               
votes.   He  stated  that currently  vetoes of  non-appropriation                                                               
bills  in  Alaska  require  two-thirds   of  legislators  for  an                                                               
override.   He  explained  that  HJR 15  creates  a uniform  veto                                                               
override  vote   threshold,  for  both  appropriation   and  non-                                                               
appropriation  bills.     He  stated  that   Alaska's  veto  vote                                                               
threshold for  appropriation bills  is disproportionate  to every                                                               
other  U.S.  state and  territory.    Alaska  is the  only  state                                                               
requiring three-fourths  of legislators; every other  state has a                                                               
two-thirds, three-fifths, or simple  majority vote threshold.  He                                                               
explained  that 38  states have  a two-thirds  vote threshold,  6                                                               
states have  a three-fifths vote  threshold, and 5 states  have a                                                               
simple majority vote threshold.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:54:27 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS stated  that  HJR 15  is a  simple                                                               
resolution.   He  expressed that  he thinks  the previous  year's                                                               
budget process  was traumatic for most  legislators and Alaskans.                                                               
He stated that  the veto power of the governor  of Alaska is, for                                                               
all intents  and purposes, unilateral, only  requiring 25 percent                                                               
of legislators'  support for a veto  to go through.   He asserted                                                               
his belief that it  is important to keep in mind  that "this is a                                                               
blade  that  goes   both  ways."    He  gave  as   an  example  a                                                               
hypothetical future  governor, who is a  strong environmentalist,                                                               
that  wants to  end mining  in Alaska.   He  stated that  in this                                                               
hypothetical  situation, the  governor  could achieve  an end  to                                                               
mining in Alaska by vetoing  out the Alaska Department of Natural                                                               
Resources (DNR), Division of Mining,  Land, and Water (DMLW) with                                                               
only  25 percent  of legislators'  support.   He stated  that the                                                               
effective policy  making power associated  with a line  item veto                                                               
is profound, and  he thinks the separation of  powers is slightly                                                               
unbalanced in Alaska.  He expressed  that he thinks this topic is                                                               
worth keeping in  mind for broader consideration.   He added that                                                               
he thinks having different override  thresholds, for policy bills                                                               
and appropriation  bills, creates  a non-uniform complexity.   As                                                               
an  example, he  referenced a  line  item veto  by Governor  Tony                                                               
Knowles  in  the  1990s  regarding   a  transfer  of  land  to  a                                                               
university.   He  explained that  Governor Knowles  asserted that                                                               
this was  an appropriation, whereas  the legislature  asserted it                                                               
was  not an  appropriation.   The  legislature did  not have  the                                                               
required three-fourths vote for an  override, but it would've had                                                               
a  two-thirds vote.   Ultimately,  this case  went to  the Alaska                                                               
Supreme  Court, which  could have  been eliminated  by a  uniform                                                               
threshold for all veto override votes.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
1:57:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX asked  whether  the  Alaska Supreme  Court                                                               
provided  an   answer  to  the  case   during  Governor  Knowles'                                                               
administration,  as  she  doesn't  think   there  has  been  much                                                               
ambiguity regarding the veto override vote threshold since then.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:57:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS answered that  he thinks the Alaska                                                               
Supreme Court  answered the  question as to  whether or  not land                                                               
transfers  constitute  appropriation,  but  he  doesn't  think  a                                                               
comprehensive delineation  has been issued by  the Alaska Supreme                                                               
Court in terms of what is and  is not an appropriation.  He added                                                               
that he thinks  it is worth noting that there  have been very few                                                               
veto overrides  attempted; mostly  the legislature knows  that it                                                               
cannot  get  the required  three-fourths  vote  to accomplish  an                                                               
override.   He stated that  he thinks, since  Alaska's statehood,                                                               
there have only been six or  seven successful veto overrides.  He                                                               
expressed that  nearly every  time the  governor wins,  while the                                                               
legislature loses because of such a high threshold.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:58:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  stated that the  six or seven  overrides referenced                                                               
earlier   were   finance   overrides,  and   he   asked   whether                                                               
Representative  Kreiss-Tomkins has  any  indication  of how  many                                                               
times there  have been overrides  of legislative  matters subject                                                               
to the two-thirds override threshold.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:58:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  replied that he does  not know but                                                               
would like to  find out.  He clarified that  he was mistaken, and                                                               
only five  vetoes have been overridden  since Alaska's statehood,                                                               
approximately one per decade.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN asked for clarification  that these were five vetoes                                                               
that required the three-fourths threshold.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS stated that that is correct.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  asked for clarification  on how the  Alaska Supreme                                                               
Court ruled regarding the land issue.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS replied  that  the Alaska  Supreme                                                               
Court  ruled   that  land   did  not   constitute  appropriation;                                                               
therefore, Governor Knowles' veto  was overridden because it fell                                                               
under the two-thirds vote threshold.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:59:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   EASTMAN   stated   that  he   noticed   in   the                                                               
presentation  it was  pointed  out  that Alaska  is  unique.   He                                                               
remarked that typically  this is viewed as a positive  thing.  He                                                               
said  he expected  to have  heard some  discussion regarding  why                                                               
Alaska  chose  to  be  unique during  the  establishment  of  its                                                               
constitution, the  silence on which he  finds to be notable.   He                                                               
asked whether  Representative Kreiss-Tomkins could  enlighten the                                                               
committee as to why Alaska chose to be unique.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:00:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  answered  that he  could  "create                                                               
some noise  on the matter."   He said that through  review of the                                                               
minutes  from the  constitutional  convention, he  saw that  this                                                               
very question was  considered.  He explained that  there were two                                                               
camps  of  delegates;  the camp  that  proposed  a  three-fourths                                                               
threshold desired to form a  strong as possible executive office,                                                               
which is  a theme that  can be seen throughout  the constitution.                                                               
He pointed out  that the attorney general  and all constitutional                                                               
officers  are   appointed  by  the   governor  and   not  elected                                                               
positions.    He  expressed  that   this  creates  the  strongest                                                               
executive  office of  all 50  U.S. states.   He  stated that  the                                                               
other camp  of delegates  highlighted the fact  that it  would be                                                               
unrealistic for the three-fourths veto  vote to ever be achieved,                                                               
and this requirement would effectively  hand the governor a semi-                                                               
unilateral budget veto power.   This camp of delegates sought out                                                               
a  more moderate  balance  of  power.   He  expressed that  after                                                               
seeing  a track  record of  so many  unsuccessful veto  overrides                                                               
over the  past half a century,  it might make sense  to bring the                                                               
balance of  power between the executive  and legislative branches                                                               
in Alaska more in line with that of other U.S. states.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:01:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN stated  that Representative Kreiss-Tomkins                                                               
mentioned it  has only  been six or  seven times  the legislature                                                               
has reached the threshold for a veto override.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:02:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  clarified that the  testimony was that it  was five                                                               
times the vote threshold was reached.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   EASTMAN   asked  Representative   Kreiss-Tomkins                                                               
whether  he  could  offer  the committee  the  number  of  vetoes                                                               
attempted, that were not overridden.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  asked Representative Eastman to  clarify whether he                                                               
was asking  how many times  the legislature met and  attempted to                                                               
override and failed,  or asking the "total number  of vetoes that                                                               
were done,  each line item counting  as one veto, and  out of the                                                               
total number of vetoes of Alaska history was a veto overridden?"                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN said  that he is looking for  an answer to                                                               
how  many times  there have  been appropriation  vetoes, and  how                                                               
many of those vetoes the legislature has attempted to override.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:03:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  stated that  he does not  know how                                                               
many  times  the  governor  has  vetoed  an  appropriation  since                                                               
Alaska's statehood, but  he can see how that would  be helpful to                                                               
the conversation  and he will try  to have an answer  by the next                                                               
hearing.    He  stated  that the  legislature  has  attempted  to                                                               
override a veto,  and failed, 16 times  since Alaska's statehood;                                                               
therefore, 5 out of 16 veto  overrides have failed.  He expressed                                                               
that he  thinks it is important  to bear in mind  that an attempt                                                               
to  override  a veto,  given  a  joint  session  and all  of  the                                                               
procedure involved,  takes a  lot of energy,  and it  seems quite                                                               
clear  that  the legislature  doesn't  even  attempt to  override                                                               
vetoes it sees as hopeless.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:04:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether  a high override threshold of                                                               
three-fourths  is meant  to protect  the rights  of not  only the                                                               
governor, but the rights of the  minority as well.  She expressed                                                               
that  she doesn't  see much  of a  difference between  the three-                                                               
fourths requirement  for a veto  override, and  the three-fourths                                                               
requirement  for the  Constitutional Budget  Reserve Fund  (CBR),                                                               
which it is not considered to be in need of change.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:05:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS answered that the issue of two-                                                                   
thirds  versus three-fourths  is more  abstract in  terms of  the                                                               
balance between majority  and minority.  He expressed  that it is                                                               
a great  question to consider  and expressed that more  than half                                                               
of his  time working  in the  legislature has  been spent  in the                                                               
minority and  not the majority.   He  stated that although  he is                                                               
currently in the majority, he is  very aware that roles can flip,                                                               
and that  it is foolish  to make  short term decisions  which are                                                               
beneficial for  only one side.   He stated that he  believes this                                                               
proposal does not unduly infringe on the rights of the minority.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS gave an  example of a veto override                                                               
from a couple of weeks prior,  in which a veto override could not                                                               
muster the two-thirds  required vote.  He said that  even if this                                                               
constitutional  amendment  were  adopted, and  Alaska's  override                                                               
threshold was  in line with  the rest  of other U.S.  states, the                                                               
override vote  would have  failed, and  the minority  would still                                                               
have expressed its  will.  He expressed that even  though he does                                                               
not  agree with  the minority's  perspective on  policies in  the                                                               
veto override  vote from  a couple of  weeks before,  he respects                                                               
the outcome.   He said that the  other 49 states in  the U.S. all                                                               
have  minority caucuses,  whereas  Alaska has  a unique  minority                                                               
which is  less empowered  than those  in other  states.   He said                                                               
that he  thinks there  is a  better balance  struck in  the other                                                               
states  between the  executive and  legislative  offices and,  by                                                               
extension, the minority caucuses and the legislature.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:08:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS   addressed  the  other   side  of                                                               
Representative  LeDoux's   question,  regarding  the  CBR.     He                                                               
expressed that  he thinks taking  funds out of  the CBR is,  in a                                                               
way,  an  additive  action,  whereas vetoing  an  action  of  the                                                               
legislature is  a subtractive one.   He explained that  he thinks                                                               
it makes sense to have a higher  threshold to take money out of a                                                               
bank,  than it  does  to  have a  high  threshold  to preserve  a                                                               
decision made  by the legislature.   He expressed that  he thinks                                                               
if the legislature  were to use a three-fourths vote  as the gold                                                               
standard for  a balance of  power between majority  and minority,                                                               
in a  hypothetical situation, it  follows that the  veto override                                                               
threshold  for policy  bills should  increase from  two-thirds to                                                               
three-fourths.  He  said that he thinks a historical  look at the                                                               
balance  of power  between the  majority and  minority throughout                                                               
Alaska's  statehood shows  that it  is statistically  uncommon to                                                               
see  minority caucuses  smaller than  one-third, which  would not                                                               
have the power to be relevant in a veto override vote.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:10:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN asked  for clarification  on the  example                                                               
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins  gave regarding the CBR  and taking                                                               
money from the bank.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:10:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  replied  that  he  would  try  to                                                               
explain  the distinction  in another  way.   He  stated that  the                                                               
power of the legislature to draw  funds from the CBR is relevant,                                                               
necessary, and  frequently used to  balance the budget.   He said                                                               
that because there is a general  fund and other revenue coming to                                                               
the state annually,  it should be possible to  balance the budget                                                               
without CBR revenue.  He added  that if the minority doesn't want                                                               
to  grant the  three-fourths vote  to approve  the withdrawal  of                                                               
funds from  the CBR, the  results shouldn't be catastrophic  in a                                                               
way  that disrupts  operations.   He expressed  that a  line item                                                               
veto  is  different  because  it allows  entire  programs  to  be                                                               
terminated; the stakes are considerably  higher than those of the                                                               
CBR.    He pointed  out  that  several  programs could  be  ended                                                               
tomorrow by  line item vetoes  to their budgets, including:   the                                                               
Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS),  the Alaska State Council on                                                               
the  Arts (ASCA),  and the  Division of  Mining, Land,  and Water                                                               
(DMLW).  He expressed  that the power of a line  item veto is far                                                               
greater than  the ability to  take money from a  savings account.                                                               
He explained that he sees it  as a matter of proportionality; the                                                               
ramifications  of being  denied access  to  the CBR  funds, by  a                                                               
three-fourths override  vote requirement,  do not carry  the same                                                               
weight  as  the consequences  of  a  three-fourths override  vote                                                               
requirement for a  line item veto that  can potentially eliminate                                                               
entire  state programs.   He  summarized  that given  what is  at                                                               
stake with  a line item veto  override vote, perhaps it  does not                                                               
make sense  to have a  threshold that is as  high as that  of the                                                               
vote requirement for the CBR.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:12:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  expressed that considering the  current discussion,                                                               
it  seems  to him  that  the  question  of a  three-fourths  vote                                                               
requirement  to draw  funds from  the CBR  is quintessentially  a                                                               
question of  legislative function.   He explained that  the power                                                               
of  appropriation, under  the constitution,  is exclusive  to the                                                               
legislature;   the  governor   cannot   appropriate  any   funds,                                                               
regardless of  whether he wants  to or not.   He said  the three-                                                               
fourths requirement  for how  the legislature  appropriates funds                                                               
is a  way for  the legislature  to restrict its  own power.   The                                                               
governor  could line  item veto  what  the legislature  withdraws                                                               
from the CBR,  but he/she can't make the  decision to appropriate                                                               
it.   He stated that  in contrast,  the question of  overriding a                                                               
veto  is  a  question  of  the  power  relationship  between  the                                                               
executive branch and the legislative branch.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:14:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on HJR 15.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:14:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CRIS EICHENLAUB testified in opposition  to HJR 15.  He expressed                                                               
that he thinks special interest  groups have currently taken over                                                               
Alaska.   He said that  he feels HJR  15 circumvents the  will of                                                               
the people  by changing the  constitution.  He explained  that it                                                               
seems to  him like special  interest groups are trying  to change                                                               
the  rules  in  order to  get  one  over  on  the majority.    He                                                               
expressed that the House, as  constructed, does not represent the                                                               
will of  the people.   He  stated that he  thinks the  Senate has                                                               
also taken power  from the Senators who  represented the people's                                                               
voice.  He said that he thinks  HJR 15 intends to take power from                                                               
the governor, who was elected  by the people and represents their                                                               
will.    He  summarized  that  essentially, he  wants  to  see  a                                                               
government that is of, by, and for the people.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:16:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN, after  ascertaining that there was no  one else who                                                               
wished to testify, closed public testimony on HJR 15.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:16:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN asked  Representative Kreiss-Tomkins  why                                                               
HJR 15  includes a  change to  the threshold  for new  tax bills,                                                               
which wasn't discussed in his presentation.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:17:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS answered  that  the discussion  on                                                               
the threshold  change for  new tax bills  was omitted  because it                                                               
has not  ever been a  factor in  Alaska's statehood; all  five of                                                               
the  successful   veto  override  votes  have   been  related  to                                                               
appropriation items.   He expressed  that Alaska seems to  have a                                                               
history of  failing to  enact revenue bills  to begin  with, much                                                               
less allow  them to be  vetoed.  He said  that it makes  sense to                                                               
have a  uniform threshold  more in line  with many  other states.                                                               
He asked  the committee  to consider  the question:   What  is it                                                               
that makes Alaska so exceptional  as to have the highest override                                                               
threshold  in the  entire country  for appropriation  and revenue                                                               
bills?                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:18:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   EASTMAN   asked  Representative   Kreiss-Tomkins                                                               
whether both issues addressed in  HJR 15 are equally important to                                                               
him.   He expressed that  he thinks  the resolution might  have a                                                               
better chance  of passing, in the  current political environment,                                                               
if he were to  choose one or the other.  He  said if the increase                                                               
to taxes were  dropped, there might be less  opposition, at least                                                               
from his district.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
2:18:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  answered that he is  willing to be                                                               
flexible; given  the political history, appropriation  vetoes are                                                               
likely to be far more relevant  in the future than revenue bills.                                                               
He stated that as an observer  of Alaska's politics, if a revenue                                                               
bill  manages  to  make  it  across  the  finish  line  from  the                                                               
legislature  "it's  probably going  to  be  pretty shot  up,  and                                                               
limping, and  dragging a leg, and  maybe two votes over  a simple                                                               
majority."  He said that at  that point, if the revenue bill gets                                                               
vetoed, it will  likely be dead regardless of whether  there is a                                                               
two-thirds  or three-fourths  vote  requirement.   He  reiterated                                                               
that he is willing to be  flexible and open to the possibility of                                                               
changes to the resolution, if it  will engender a broader base of                                                               
support.   He  summarized  that from  an academic  constitutional                                                               
perspective,  a uniform  vote threshold  seems cleaner,  simpler,                                                               
more straightforward, and makes sense.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:20:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN remarked that if a  revenue measure came up that was                                                               
a modification  of oil and  gas taxes, the public  perception and                                                               
desire for the  governor to have a stronger  veto authority would                                                               
be different  than if  it were  an income  tax modification.   He                                                               
predicted  that  some  of Representative  Eastman's  constituents                                                               
wouldn't be opposed  to a two-thirds override for an  oil and gas                                                               
tax bill but  would probably prefer a  three-fourths override for                                                               
an income tax bill.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:21:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN  remarked  that   Chair  Claman  made  an                                                               
important  distinction about  constituencies.    He reiterated  a                                                               
concern  raised earlier  by Representative  LeDoux,  and he  said                                                               
that HJR  15 wouldn't  change the  governor's power  to line-item                                                               
veto, it  would only  change the  ability of  a minority  vote to                                                               
affect  the outcome  of an  override vote.   He  said that  he is                                                               
sensitive to the fact that that is where the main issue lies.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:22:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  remarked  that he  would  dispute                                                               
this  characterization  but acknowledges  that  this  is the  way                                                               
Representative  Eastman views  HJR  15.   He  expressed that  the                                                               
bottom line is that  the governor is the one who  puts ink on the                                                               
paper  of  a  budget  bill,  and  it  becomes  the  legislature's                                                               
decision to  either sustain the  governor's decision  or override                                                               
it.  He said that the  legislature is secondary to the governor's                                                               
decision, and the legislature ultimately  becomes a referendum on                                                               
the governor's  will.  He expressed  that he sees the  veto power                                                               
as an  executive power and  the legislature  as "the tail  on the                                                               
dog," but he understands what Representative Eastman is saying.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:23:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  commented that he thinks  personality should                                                               
be taken out of this discussion  entirely and the focus should be                                                               
on what  the balance of power  should look like in  the structure                                                               
of government  between the legislative, executive,  and judiciary                                                               
branches.    He  said  that  in  1997  the  legislature  overrode                                                               
Governor  Knowles'  veto  of  the  parent  notification  bill  on                                                               
abortion.   He  expressed that  he imagines  the legislature  was                                                               
very  glad this  was not  an  appropriation bill  and they  could                                                               
reach  the two-thirds  limit.   He added  that if  there were  an                                                               
appropriation  bill to  fund Planned  Parenthood, there  would be                                                               
many  people happy  for  a two-thirds  vote  on an  appropriation                                                               
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP expressed  that he thinks it  is important to                                                               
think larger than specific issues,  such as ferries and abortion,                                                               
and  focus  on   what  is  a  fundamentally   fair  and  balanced                                                               
threshold,  which would  represent the  will of  the majority  of                                                               
Alaskans.   He remarked, "It's easy  to think about how  you want                                                               
the council shaped  if you have the king in  place that you want.                                                               
But then, when you don't have  the king that you want, you think,                                                               
'Oh, I  wish that we'd  never messed  with that.'"   He expressed                                                               
that he could  see uniformity being very  desirable, depending on                                                               
the  issue, on  both appropriation  and non-appropriation  bills.                                                               
He summarized  that he  appreciates the  sponsor bringing  HJR 15                                                               
forward and thinks it presents an important discussion.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:25:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN  announced that  HJR  15  would  be held  over  for                                                               
further review.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HJR 15 v. M 1.21.2020.PDF HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM
HJR 15
HJR 15 Sponsor Statement 1.21.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM
HJR 15
HJR 15 Sectional Analysis v. M 1.21.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM
HJR 15
HJR 15 Supporting Document - NCSL Table 1.21.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HSTA 1/23/2020 3:00:00 PM
HJR 15
HJR 15 Presentation 2.5.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HJR 15
HJR 15 Fiscal Note OOG-DOE 1.29.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HJR 15
HB 133 v. M 2.3.2020.PDF HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Sponsor Statement 2.3.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Sectional Analysis v. M 2.3.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Supporting Document - One-Sheeter 2.3.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Supporting Document - Carey Case 4.22.2019.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Supporting Document - Temporary Secure Juvenile Holding Areas 2.3.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Supporting Document - Questions and Answers 2.3.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Supporting Document - DJJ Letter 5.13.19.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 PowerPoint Presentation 2.4.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133
HB 133 Fiscal Note DHSS-PS 1.16.2020.pdf HJUD 2/5/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/7/2020 1:45:00 PM
HJUD 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 133