Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
03/16/2021 01:30 PM Senate HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
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.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR4 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 93 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SJR 4-CONST. AM: ABORTION/FUNDING
1:32:07 PM
VICE CHAIR HUGHES announced the consideration of SENATE JOINT
RESOLUTION NO. 4 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of
the State of Alaska relating to abortion. She stated her intent
to hear an overview of the bill, sponsored by herself, and to
listen to testimony.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said that SJR 4 was heard last year. It
proposes an amendment to restore to voters and their
democratically elected representatives the power to set policy
related to abortion. This authority was usurped in recent
decades by a series of misguided state court decisions. In 1973,
Roe vs. Wade ruled that there is an alleged right to abortion
under the federal constitution. However, the U.S. Supreme Court
has permitted states to put parameters around abortion. For
example, states can require parental involvement before an
abortion can be performed on a minor. The state can determine
whether or not public funds can be used for abortion. A state
can decide whether certain medical procedures related to
abortion can be performed, such as partial birth abortion. But
in Alaska, there have been a number of decisions (which she will
review in the Judiciary Committee) made by legislators and
voters, all overturned by the state courts. That began in 1997
when the Alaska Supreme Court declared that the judicially-
manufactured right to abortion protects abortion more broadly,
more broadly than the U.S. Constitution. As a result, the
commonsense laws that Alaskans have adopted, which have stood
the test of time in other states and have been upheld by federal
courts, have been declared invalid in Alaska. The Alaskan
rulings have been quite extreme.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said that in Alaska today, a girl as young as
13 could have her boyfriend bring her to an abortion clinic and
her parents would not know about it, much less have the right to
consent. The only reason for this deplorable situation is that
the Supreme Court demanded it. Alaska voters have said yes to
parental involvement, and the legislature has supported parental
involvement. All of Alaska's governors for the last 18 years
have supported parental involvement, but because of the decision
of four unelected judges on the Alaska Supreme Court, the rights
of parents are not protected. It is an outrage that demands to
be fixed. She wants to make it clear that this resolution does
not set any policy on abortion specifically, but it answers the
question of who will decide what the policy shall be--should it
be judges or the people of Alaska. SJR 4 empowers elected
officials or Alaskans directly through the initiative process to
set policy on abortion that is consistent with Alaskan values.
Other states have passed constitutional amendments that restore
or protect the authority of voters to determine abortion policy.
It is time for Alaska to do the same.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES displayed slide 2 of the presentation on SJR
4. The slide showed part of the original Hippocratic oath, which
said, "I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion."
That was removed in 1948.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES showed slide 2, about the first Declaration of
Geneva, which "came in response to the grotesquely inhumane
treatment of individuals in Nazi Germany, kept the pledge to...
maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of
conception." Things have changed in recent decades with the 1973
U.S. Supreme Court ruling. She called her aide Lisa Hart to the
table to continue the presentation about what has been happening
around the country. SJR 4 will put Alaska on par with other
states.
1:38:20 PM
LISA HART, Staff, Senator Shelley Hughes, Alaska State
legislature, displayed a map on slide 4 of eight states that
have minimal or no timing restrictions for abortion. State
lawmakers across the country have used the legislative process
to reflect the will of the voters.
MS. HART said that in 1973 the Supreme Court established that
states could prohibit abortion after viability. Viability is
determined on an individual state basis. The average is around
22-24 weeks. Twenty-four states have this law in place. Fourteen
states, shown on slide 16, disallow abortion after 18-22 weeks.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said that this is not a partisan conversation,
but her office used maps that showed the balance of power in
various states. The key on the map in blue is a Democratic
trifecta, red is Republican, and gray represents a mix of
Republican and Democratic.
1:40:07 PM
SENATOR BEGICH asked if it is not a partisan discussion, then
why does the presentation use a partisan map.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES replied that the point is that the maps of
these policies show the states are blue, red, and gray, so the
mixture shows it is not partisan.
MS. HART showed the six states on slide 7 that have enacted
legislation to disallow abortion after 6-8 weeks. This
legislation is commonly known as a heartbeat bill.
MS. HART showed on slide 8 the states that have enacted
legislation for parental involvement in the form of parental
consent and notification.
MS. HART showed on slide 9 that 42 states have taken action with
regard to abortion legislation. State-level legislation has
allowed much needed debate about the roles of government. This
has not been the case in Alaska. It has been not for lack of
trying.
MS. HART displayed slide 10, What about Alaska, which made the
following points:
The Alaska Supreme Court has determined that the state
constitution provides a broader right to abortion than that
interpreted in the U.S. Constitution.
Passing SJR 4 will allow common-sense abortion policies if
we so choose as permitted under the federal constitution.
It will allow elected officials -- or the people acting
through the initiative process -- to determine the policies
on abortion, instead of unelected justices on the Supreme
Court.
MS. HART showed examples on slide 11-13 of abortion-related laws
overturned in Alaska. The legislative process was followed,
giving voice to the people of Alaska, but the courts legislated
from the bench and struck down these laws. This is the reason
the sponsor seeks to adopt this resolution, to prevent any
further judicial overreach related to abortion in the state of
Alaska.
MS. HART presented the sectional analysis for SJR 4:
Section 1 Article I, Constitution of the State of
Alaska, Page 1, Lines 3-7
Amends the Constitution of the State of Alaska by
adding a new section, Section 26. Abortion. The
amendment states that in order to protect human life,
nothing in this constitution may be construed to
secure or protect a right to an abortion or require
the State to fund an abortion.
Section 2 Article I, Constitution of the State of
Alaska, Page 1, Lines 8-10
Adds that the amendment proposed by this resolution
shall be placed before the voters of the state at the
next general election in conformity with art. XIII,
sec. 1, Constitution of the State of Alaska, and the
election laws of the state.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES asked committee members to hold questions
because invited testimony may address some of their concerns.
1:45:14 PM
SANDRA DENTON, M.D., representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said
she has practiced emergency room medicine for 13 years and for
the last 35 years, she has been in alternative medicine. The
court has manufactured the right to an abortion using the state
constitution when it does not do that. Abortion is not stated in
that area of the constitution. Parents should have a say in what
is going on with their child and should be notified. The Alaskan
voters themselves have been ignored, and policy rewritten by
unelected officials. She took the Hippocratic Oath and wishes to
follow it. At first she thought she was too busy to testify, but
felt that if she did not speak out, then perhaps the blood of
these human beings would be on her hands. She thanked Senator
Hughes for bringing this to the forefront.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said that she appreciated Dr. Denton taking
the time to testify.
1:48:12 PM
LOREN LEMAN, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said that for
14 years he was in the legislature and served as lieutenant
governor for four years. SJR 4 is an important step to restore
to the legislature and the people of Alaska the ability to set
policy on abortion. Sadly, that authority has been usurped for
more than two decades by Alaska courts. For 24 years he has
defended the rights of parents to be involved in the lives of
their minor daughters. This effort has been disrupted by the
misrepresentation of the state constitution, but he is not
defeated and he is not giving up. In 1997, he sponsored SB 24 to
enable the state to enforce a law that had been on the books
since 1970 that required a doctor to obtain parental consent
before performing an abortion on a girl under the age of 18. An
opinion issued by Attorney General Av Gross later that decade
said that law was unenforceable because of a U.S. Supreme Court
ruling requiring that state parental involvement laws must allow
minors the alternative to seek a waiver in court. This is
commonly known as a judicial bypass. So, for many years, the
state ignored the parental consent provision. The bill he
introduced added a judicial bypass in full compliance of the
rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.
1:50:18 PM
MR. LEMAN said that at the time, the court has most recently
issued a nine-to-zero decision in a case from Montana, saying in
effect not to send it any more of these cases because it had
already told the states that it approves parental involvement
statutes with these provisions. Even Justice Ruth Ginsburg
agreed. SB 24 passed the legislature with supermajority support,
enough to override a veto from Governor Tony Knowles. The
Parental Consent Act was tied up in courts for ten long years.
He was extremely disappointed when the Alaska Supreme Court in a
3-2 decision struck it down. The majority opinion, written by
Justice Dana Fabe, said that a less restrictive law, such as
only requiring notification of one parent with a bypass, would
be acceptable. The bill to do this was introduced but did not
advance through committee.
MR. LEMAN said that he joined with two other Alaskans, including
Senator Costello, to sponsor a voter initiative for a law
requiring notice for one parent. More than 56 percent approved
ballot measure 2, so today he is speaking for more than 90,000
voters. Planned Parenthood challenged the law, but Superior
Court Judge John Suddock upheld it. Shockingly, years later,
four justices on the Alaska Supreme Court struck it down. They
produced 64 pages of legal nonsense to justify their position.
On any topic related to abortion, the decisions of the majority
of Supreme Court justices are driven not by the law but by
personal ideology. That is a problem. Legislators make public
policy influenced by their values and life experiences. They
earn that right by winning an election. Unelected judges never
earn that right. When they exceed their authority, they deserve
an aggressive response.
MR. LEMAN said that this resolution does not change abortion
law. It restores to elected leaders and the people of Alaska
their proper roles in setting abortion policy. When passed by
the legislature and the voters of Alaska, it will invite
considerably more discussion on what protections the people want
for parents and their children. He hopes to participate in that
discussion.
1:54:16 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD said that Mr. Leman's tenacity is incredible
over the last decades. He sets a great example. In 2006 or 2007,
she went before the Supreme Court during public testimony about
parental rights and involvement regarding abortion. Nineteen
people wanted parental involvement and one didn't, but Chief
Justice Fabe did not listen to the people. She brings that
memory to her role as the Judiciary chair, that complete
disregard for parental rights. She became involved in the ballot
initiative with the Family Council. The courts struck that down.
She thanked Senator Hughes for bringing this forward. She is
tired of judges setting policy from the bench.
1:56:50 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO noted the two sections on page 1, lines 5 and
6. One section says that nothing in the constitution may be
construed to secure or protect a right to abortion. She asked if
that is clarifying Article 1, the right to privacy and the right
to equal protection. She asked if Vice Chair Hughes believes
that if that had been in the constitution, that the cases she
had referred to would have had different outcomes.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES replied that she does. Those are the things
that have been used in the rulings.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked with the statement, "or require the state
to fund an abortion" if the intention of the sponsor is to give
the legislature and the governor the option to not have elective
abortions funded in the Medicaid budget.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES answered if the legislature so chose, it would
not allow public funds for abortion, so it could pertain to
Medicaid. That is allowed under the federal constitution.
SENATOR COSTELLO shared that she had had a long conversation
with a constituent today who asked whether the intention here is
to weaken Roe vs. Wade.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES replied that this allows the people of Alaska
to decide. The range of abortion policy could be leaving
everything the way it is now to doing some things, such as
reinstating parental notification and consent, to going all the
way to no abortions. That would go to the Supreme Court as a
challenge. If two-thirds of the house and senate decide that
this will go on the ballot, the people will decide, but it does
not change any abortion policy at this point. Decisions would be
by the people through the voter initiative or legislatively. It
could go up the ladder to the U.S. Supreme Court.
1:59:43 PM
VICE CHAIR HUGHES opened public testimony and imposed a two-
minute time limit.
2:00:18 PM
KATIE BOTZ, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, said she is a
supporter of SJR 4 because her biological parents kept her
alive. Her parents already had a family in South Korea. She was
an unexpected child. Her biological parents tried to take her
home but after one week, she was hospitalized and her biological
parents decided to put her up for adoption. She shares this
story because her biological parents allowed her to live. If her
life is still precious and still valuable, she asked then why
everyone else's isn't.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said there are passions about this topic on
both sides of the issue. She asked that everyone be civil in
their comments. She wants everyone to understand that this is
not implementing a particular policy regarding abortion at this
point. The passage of this resolution, if it voted in at the
ballot box, in and of itself does not set any specific
parameters. It would simply allow the people of Alaska to decide
what policy they want in the future instead of allowing judges
to make those decisions. She wanted to make sure everyone has
the correct information when testifying.
2:05:26 PM
MORGAN LIM, Planned Parenthood Votes, Northwest and Hawaii,
Juneau, Alaska, said Alaska is experiencing health crises on
multiple fronts, including the ongoing pandemic, rising STIs
(sexually transmitted infections), and structural racism.
Instead of helping people get the health care they need,
lawmakers are focusing on limiting rights and inserting
government into personal, private healthcare decisions. This
will impact those already experiencing barriers to reproductive
healthcare in Alaska. These communities, especially American
Indian and Alaska Native people, have endured a history of
state-controlled reproductive coercion and denial of bodily
autonomy. Banning abortion will continue this legacy. Alaska
people do not want SJR 4. They want increased access to
reproductive healthcare, including abortion. Alaskans know that
access to abortion is critical to their health, the health of
their families, and the stability of their communities. It is
more important than ever that the Alaska Constitution protect
the right to obtain or reject medical treatment without
governmental interference in personal, private decisions.
2:08:25 PM
MICHAEL THOMAS, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said that
so many issues have been brought up. What he hears is that a
rogue court is in the state. His understanding is one person,
one vote, and the court is making decisions for Alaskans. That
is what this is addressing. People have to do something about
the court. These are bad guys doing bad stuff.
2:10:07 PM
WINDY PERKINS, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said she
supports this amendment to the constitution. She could not agree
more with the prior caller. This pertains to so many issues. The
state needs a balance in the governmental system. The beauty of
a three-branch system is being violated. Her vote is being
violated. In regard to abortion, as a young woman if she had
found herself in a precarious situation and if she had been
under bad influences, she could have terminated a pregnancy. She
would need her parents' help that situation. It is evil that the
court system has taken this beautiful family structure and
twisted it so that people are vulnerable.
2:12:11 PM
ELEILIA PRESTON, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, said she
echoes the two before her. This is all about judges and their
overreach. She has campaigned and worked hard to put people in
office who deserve it, so those people can make laws, but that
is undermined by what courts are doing.
2:14:00 PM
KEITH HAMILTON, Ph.D., representing self, Soldotna, Alaska, said
that although he is on the State Board of Education,
Professional Teaching Practices Commission, State Personnel
Board, and the founding president of Alaska Christian College,
he is representing himself. His birth mother was 17 and her
parents wanted her to have an abortion but at that time abortion
was illegal and he had the ability to be adopted. His story is
told many times over many years. Every womb carries life that
must be born. To kill a baby at any age is wrong. As a
Christian, he understands the Bible to proclaim that every life
is loved by God. He supports the constitutional change "to
protect human life."
2:15:57 PM
MARY ELIZABETH KEHRHAHAN-STARK, representing self, Fairbanks,
Alaska, said SJR 4 erodes the Alaska Constitution's privacy
protection. SJR 4 is an example of what right-to-life supporters
and legislative body want so badly to accomplish, which is to
abolish a woman's right to privacy in her thoughts and actions.
By permanently changing the constitution, the legislature could
decide citizens' rights and protection under law. The reality is
that those most affected by this proposed amendment are the most
vulnerable in the community. Most people who get abortions are
single and poor. The result of this resolution would be to place
a single woman in the largest group living in poverty in the
United States. She is 64. At another point in her life she was
young and poor and going to life to secure a better life for
herself and community. She had to make this decision. It was the
best decision of her life. She thanks God that abortion was safe
and legal because she was not ready emotionally or financially
to be a mother of a child. Each Alaskan, regardless of financial
status, deserves the opportunity to control her own life at the
most basic level.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES encouraged written testimony be sent to
shss@akleg.gov.
2:20:15 PM
KAREN BAKER, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said that
seeking to amend the constitution to ban abortion care is
inappropriate and harmful. Using time and resources to try to
limit access to necessary health care during a pandemic is
irresponsible. Alaska is a nationwide leader in poor indicators
of sexual and reproductive health with some of the highest rates
of unintended pregnancies, STIs, intimate partner violence, and
sexual assault. Lawmakers should be focusing on preventive
health services. Alaskans need and deserve continued access to
safe and legal abortion care. Nearly 80 percent of Alaska voters
say they would have doubts about legislation that bans abortion
care. When the courts overturn antiabortion legislation, they
are not legislating from the bench. Striking down illegal
legislation is part of the responsibility of the court.
Continuing to defend illegal, harmful legislation is a waste of
taxpayer money. Alaska has a stellar state constitution and does
not need to mar it with these partisan attacks on healthcare.
2:21:54 PM
SHANNON NYE, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, said that the
Constitution states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Life is an
inalienable right. When there is a creation in a womb, it has a
heartbeat.
2:23:22 PM
KAREN LEWIS, Board of Directors, Pro Life Alaska, Wasilla,
Alaska, said that the people of Alaska have the right and duty
to decide abortion policy, not activist judges who legislate
from the bench. Alaskans are tired of that. People are talking
about babies, not reproductive healthcare. It is a sanitized
term for abortion, which is a barbaric act of murdering unborn
babies.
2:25:47 PM
JANET KIDD, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, said this
amendment would likely be voted down. Sixty-three percent of
Alaskan recently have indicated that abortion should be legal in
all or most cases. Alaskan has always prided itself on the
provision for the right to privacy in the constitution. The
amendment proposed by SJR 8 is fundamental departure from this
long-standing provision. Women need to have access to abortion
for a variety of reasons. These are personal decisions and the
government should not have the right to affect that decision.
The right to privacy does not start at 18. She is so grateful
for the Alaska Supreme Court. They are considering the rights of
all Alaskans.
2:27:46 PM
DORAN HICKMAN, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, said that a
whole lot of factors are involved, economics, mental health, a
woman's right to choose. People are not here to judge and are
not placed on earth to condemn them.
2:28:50 PM
LYNETTE PHAM, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said this
will pave the way to ban safe and legal abortion. In the past,
forced sterilization of indigenous women without their consent
was common. This amendment forces governmental control onto the
bodies of indigenous brown and black people. It would make space
for removing their rights without their consent and perpetuates
forms of racism, colonization, and governmental control of
bodies. Individual rights and freedoms go to the heart of who
Alaska is at a state, including the right to access safe and
legal abortion. Each person deserves the opportunity to control
their life at the most basic level, their bodies, their
families, and life paths.
2:30:12 PM
CHRISTINE ROBBINS, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, said
SJR 4 puts the will of the people back in the hands of the
people. There is an imbalance and lack of decency on the part of
activist judges who are acting outside the scope of their
duties. This abuse of power must stop. The unconstitutional
limitations that the Alaska Supreme Court has imposed on
Alaskans by radical judges needs to be addressed. This does not
limit rights. It gives people more. The rights of the baby, the
parents, the individual, and the people as a whole are
addressed. Abortion is never safe and 100 percent of the time
results in a death. This is a responsible and humane step in the
right direction.
2:31:41 PM
VICE CHAIR HUGHES noted that Senator Reinbold was listening by
telephone.
2:31:53 PM
JULIE ENDLE, representing self, Palmer, Alaska, said that
Alaskans should have a say in deciding the vote. That is why
they vote. As a taxpayer, she does not want to fund abortions.
It is wrong. A lot of people testified about the right to
privacy. If they want a right to privacy, then they should fund
it themselves and not put the burden on taxpayers. Alaska should
have the right to vote and keep the Supreme Court judges out of
it.
2:32:58 PM
CANDACE KALE, representing self, Denali, Alaska, said this is a
radical bill that proposes to permanently change the state
constitution, taking away individual rights and freedoms, which
are the foundation of the country and a source of immense pride
in the state of Alaska. This is all done in an attempt to take
away rights and the ability to make decisions about people's
bodies, whether or not to become a parent. SJR 4 is an attempt
to bypass one branch of government, the courts, because the
legislature is unhappy about the ruling. Rulings by the courts
are a part of process. She has had an abortion and placed a baby
for adoption. Those were her choices. They were right for her
and no one else should have the right to make that decision for
her.
2:34:24 PM
KELVIN ROGERS, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, said the
courts are doing a great job of following the law and science.
He does not trust the public to get it right on this. Sometimes
the courts are ahead of public opinion, such as in Loving vs.
Virginia in 1967. The public approval of interracial marriage
didn't reach 50 percent until 1995. If this bill passes it will
be followed by zealous and unconstitutional restrictions,
wasting more of the state's time and money fighting legal
battles over a political wedge issue. For those who oppose
abortion, they should fund sexual and birth control education,
which would reduce instances of people seeking abortion.
2:35:53 PM
XOCHITL LOPEZ, representing self, Homer, Alaska, said this is a
shameful attack on abortion access again. Abortion is protected
by the U.S. Constitution, not "alleged" as Senator Hughes said
earlier, and by the Alaska Constitution. It takes much energy
from her to remind legislators that abortion is legal. Ms. Lopez
continues to call into to these meetings to advocate for
abortion access. If legislators care about Alaska parents, they
should focus on lack of affordable housing, the rising cost of
childcare, increased medical costs, the introducing
comprehensive sex education, and navigating education during the
pandemic. Laws preventing teens from obtaining healthcare unless
they can talk to a parent put their health and safety at risk.
For teens who feel they cannot safely turn to their parents,
government coercion doesn't change anything and going to courts
jeopardizes their confidentiality, particularly in small
communities. Roe vs. Wade was not about the moral implications
of abortion. It was about safety, equal access, and the right to
privacy. She urged the legislature to keep abortion safe and
legal.
2:38:49 PM
JOHN SOMIN, representing self, Douglas, Alaska, said he is
appalled that misinformation has overrun this democratic state
and nation. The country has been having a battle with women's
liberty for at least half a century. No one has the liberty to
tell another person what their liberty is.
2:42:03 PM
PAMELA SAMASH, representing self, Nenana, Alaska, said that she
is a child of a teenager who everyone told to get an abortion.
No one should have the right to terminate her. The Supreme Court
should never have had the authority to even claim that this
process was legal. She has a purpose and is as important as
everyone else, even though she was inside a 15-year-old girl.
She is precious, regardless of whether she is poor or rich.
Years ago she was involved in the ballot for parent
notification. Alaskans showed they wanted this, but their voices
were silenced and their rights as citizens stolen from them.
2:44:06 PM
CYNTHIA DUCEY, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said that
abortion in Alaska has been legal but it was not passed by the
legislature but through administration regulation and imposed on
the people by bureaucrats. Attempts to restrict abortion have
been defeated by judges. In 2001, the court created the artifice
of a constitutionally-protected right to reproductive freedom.
This is not found anywhere in the U.S. or Alaska Constitution.
Planned Parenthood's main profit is from the abortion industry.
There is no constitutional right to reproductive freedom, but
judges have interpreted the Alaska Constitution's right to
privacy protects abortion, but this is not what the
constitutional framers intended and not what citizens wanted. In
polls taken since then show the tides are shifting and Americans
want restrictions on abortion. Babies are viable at 21 weeks.
She said let the people decide and not judges and bureaucrats.
2:46:58 PM
THERESA SYREM, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said that
Alaska will watch how both sides of the aisle respond. SJR 4
only codifies what should be acknowledged by the Supreme Court,
the manifest need for a clause in the Alaska constitution. That
is all it does. All legislators owe the people that right of
government of, by, and for the people. Those who do not support
the legislation do not give people a voice, especially the
unborn constituents. Prolife legislators have long avoided
responsibility for their failure to stand up for basic rights,
to have a constitution that judges will be forced to
acknowledge. She asked who will stand up for constituents and
who will not.
2:50:12 PM
TRACI SUNDBERG, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, said that
many great things have been brought up today. As a parent of
four, there is more than enough sex education and funding for it
out there. She doesn't necessarily agree with the testimony that
most abortions are for low-income people. As a parent, she would
want to know. For SJR 4, it is important that the voters' vote
counts.
2:51:29 PM
CAROL CARMAN, representing self, Palmer, Alaska, said that she
was stunned when the legislature passed and the governor signed
a bill outlawing state-funded abortions just for the judiciary
to take the opposite stand, citing the state constitution as the
reason. The state constitution says that government is of, by,
and for the people. Adults in the state should have the right to
decide a matter of life and death rather than the courts telling
people that they do not have the right to choose laws that
reflect their community standards. Nothing in the constitution
protects the murder of unborn babies. This resolution should
take care of judges legislating from the bench on this issue.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a well-known
phrase in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration says
all humans have inalienable rights given to them by their
creator, which governments are created to protect. The judiciary
is overstepping its bounds in ways that cannot be backed up by
law or the constitution. Right to privacy does not mean right to
murder. If judges want equal protection, they would outlaw
abortion. People's right to control their bodies ends where
another individual's body begins. This resolution gives citizens
of the state the opportunity to vote for bills that reflect
their community standards.
2:54:05 PM
STEPHANIE TAYLOR, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said
prolife Alaskans have worked to get laws passed to protect
unborn lives. At every turn Alaskan courts have reversed these
efforts. The courts have not remained neutral on the issue of
abortion. The people of Alaska have made it clear by their votes
and efforts that they support the protection of unborn life.
Reasonable regulation of abortion is in the best interests of
women and unborn babies. Plenty of legal protections are in
place to protect women's privacy and young Alaskans. The fact
that abortion is legal does not make it right. It is time for
Alaska to move forward and enshrine protection of human life in
its constitution.
2:55:48 PM
LISA GENTEMANN, representing self, Eagle River, Alaska, said
Alaska must defend, protect, and speak up for the safety and the
rights of the unborn. Even before the Constitution was written,
the Declaration of Independence said all were given inalienable
right to life by their creator. Government must secure people's
rights and the rights of the unborn. The judicial branch is not
following the Declaration of Independence. People must declare
judges unfit to rule in a free nation and remove them from power
and institute officials who will defend the right of life. She
has been a single parent. It is challenging. She is thankful to
have her son and grandchildren. She urged legislators to support
all life, especially the unborn.
2:58:27 PM
HILARY HUNTER, representing self, Petersburg, Alaska, said she
advocates for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence
and is a survivor of both. Alaska in 2019 had four times the
national average for sexual assault and the average age was 15.
Fifteen-year-olds can get pregnant and quite often it can be by
someone in the family. Requiring them to get permission and to
find out what their rights are after having the experience of
their bodies being taken away from them, to go through the
experience of pregnancy, sounds like a recipe for mental health
and suicide. If the state is prioritizing young Alaskans, the
state needs to let them know that they are important and they
deserve to be protected. Before the state takes away rights and
protections, the state should make sure there is a system there
to catch them. It takes over a year to convict someone with less
than a 10 percent conviction rate.
3:00:59 PM
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said the bill has subsequent referrals to
Judiciary and Finance, so there will be further opportunities
for testimony.
3:01:41 PM
CANDY MILLER, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, recalled
hearing an Alaska Native woman supporting the defunding of
abortion. As a woman of faith, the woman read from Proverbs. Ms.
Miller understood that the people are the power. She does not
want to be involved in any aspect of funding hands that shed
innocent blood. SJR 4 does not deal with choice but deals with
not using state money for abortion.
VICE CHAIR HUGHES said that she wants to hear from all, no
matter what side they are. Written testimony can be sent to
shss@akleg.gov.
3:04:32 PM
SHERRY EICHENLAUB, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, said that
children need permission slips for field trips, but they can
have an abortion without parent knowledge. That is horrific. The
judges need to listen to the Alaska people.
3:05:27 PM
VICE CHAIR HUGHES closed public testimony and held SJR 4 in
committee.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked everyone waiting to please send written
testimony.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SJR 4 version A.PDF |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM SJUD 4/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM SJUD 4/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM SJUD 4/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Fiscal Note Governor.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM SJUD 4/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Updated Powerpoint HSS Mar 16 2021.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 State of Alaska Dept of H&SS 2019 Alaska Induced Termination of Pregnancy Stats.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Letters of Support 3.16.21_Redacted.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Letters of Opposition 3.16.21_Redacted.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |
| SJR 4 Letter of Support - Leman.pdf |
SHSS 3/16/2021 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 4 |