03/29/1993 09:35 AM Senate FIN

                                                                               
  SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 2                                           
                                                                               
       Relating  to  certification  of the  Alaska  State                      
       Legislature's opposition  to requiring  suspension                      
       of a driver's license for drug offenses.                                
                                                                               
  Upon convening the meeting,  Co-chairman Frank directed that                 
  SCR  2   be  brought  on  for  discussion.    SENATOR  SHARP                 
  referenced a draft  Senate Finance Committee Substitute  (8-                 
  LS0631\J) and  MOVED for  adoption for discussion  purposes.                 
  No objection having been raised, IT WAS SO ORDERED.                          
                                                                               
  Senator Sharp explained  that the Senate Finance  version is                 
  intended to "take care of the problem of the federal mandate                 
  on highway funds."  The  state was faced with the  option of                 
  passing either a bill or a  resolution.  The Finance version                 
  cleans up and eliminates objectional phrases in the original                 
  resolution.  A resolution containing the same wording as the                 
  Finance  version  is presently  making  its way  through the                 
  House.                                                                       
                                                                               
                                                                               
  There  is  an April  1  deadline  on passage.    Federal law                 
  requires that  states must have  enacted and be  enforcing a                 
  law  that  provides  for  revocation  or  suspension  of  an                 
  individual's driving license  upon conviction of  possession                 
  of  a  controlled substance  or any  drug  offense.   SB 133                 
  (REVOCATION OF DRIVER'S LICENSE) was introduced to meet that                 
  requirement.  The  proposed resolution is an  alternative to                 
  passage of  SB 133.   The alternative  provides that  states                 
  submit  to the Secretary  of Transportation  a certification                 
  stating  that  the  Governor  is  opposed  to  enactment  or                 
  enforcement of the required revocation, and the  legislature                 
  has adopted a resolution expressing  its opposition as well.                 
  The  administration  has indicated  it  will support  either                 
  approach.                                                                    
                                                                               
  Penalties  are  severe  if  the  state  does  not  meet  the                 
  statutory  requirement.   Approximately  5%  of its  federal                 
  highway  apportionment for  FY 94  will  be withheld.   That                 
  percentage would  also be  withheld in  FY 95.   Thereafter,                 
  commencing with FY  96, 10% would  be withheld.  The  fiscal                 
  note demonstrates what would be lost if  the federal mandate                 
  is not met.                                                                  
                                                                               
  Many states have opted to  proceed with a similar resolution                 
  because  they  resent  federal  government intervention  and                 
  philosophically   disagree   with  proposed   enactment  and                 
  enforcement of law.   Sixteen  states have passed  statutes,                 
  but only three have met the federal mandate.                                 
                                                                               
  The fiscal note evidences the cost of a 5% reduction for the                 
  first  two  years of  ISTEA  based on  the  anticipated $212                 
  million Alaska is likely to receive.                                         
                                                                               
  Senator  Sharp  next   directed  attention  to   a  proposed                 
  amendment and  explained that  it would  change October  31,                 
  1993, to October 1, 1993, at page 1, line 10.  The change is                 
  needed  to  meet  the federal  mandate.    Co-chairman Frank                 
  called for objections  to adoption.  None  were forthcoming,                 
  and AMENDMENT NO. 1 WAS ADOPTED.                                             
                                                                               
  Senator Sharp  then  directed  attention  to  the  following                 
  intent language:                                                             
                                                                               
       It is the intent of  the Alaska State Legislature,                      
       in  enacting  SCR  2,  that  the State  of  Alaska                      
       continue  to  vigorously enforce  laws prohibiting                      
       illegal  drug  use,  while   avoiding  unnecessary                      
       entanglement  with  the  federal  government  over                      
       which method is most effective  to prevent illegal                      
       drug  use.    It   is  also  the  intent  of   the                      
       Legislature that the  State maintain its sovereign                      
       right to enact legislation  punishing illegal drug                      
       use  and  that  the  enactment  of  criminal  laws                      
       applicable to  illegal drug  use in  the state  be                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
       reserved to the legislature.                                            
                                                                               
  Co-chairman Frank called  for objections to adoption  of the                 
  intent.   No objection  having  been raised,  the LETTER  OF                 
  INTENT WAS ADOPTED.                                                          
                                                                               
  Senator  Kelly  MOVED  that  CSSCR  2  (Finance)  pass  from                 
  committee   with   individual   recommendations    and   the                 
  accompanying letter  of intent.   No  objection having  been                 
  raised, CSSCR 2 (Finance) was REPORTED OUT of committee with                 
  the Senate  Finance letter of  intent and zero  fiscal notes                 
  from the Dept. of Public Safety and  Dept. of Transportation                 
  and Public  Facilities.   All members  signed the  committee                 
  report with a "do pass" recommendation with the exception of                 
  Co-chair Pearce who was not present at the meeting.