Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/08/1997 03:33 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSHB 112(FIN) AMEND DEFINITION OF "POLITICAL PARTY"
CHAIRMAN GREEN brought CSHB 112(FIN) before the committee as the
next order of business.
REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY, prime sponsor of HB 112, said recognizing
that since 1970 the state of Alaska has not elected a governor by
a majority vote, he introduced the legislation as a means of
modifying the state's election law in the smallest way possible
which might produce a result that might reduce the number of
candidates that appear on the ballot and might increase Alaska's
chance of electing a governor by a majority vote.
Representative Vezey said Alaska's election law is well established
and has withstood constitutional challenge, and the approach in HB
112 is to not restrict or further restrict access to the ballot,
but to expand the means by which a group of people can organize and
get recognition as a political party. It sets a standard that in
addition to qualifying for the ballot by getting 3 percent of the
vote, that if a party has registered voters equal to 3 percent of
the vote cast in the last gubernatorial election, which would be
6,500 registered voters under a party affiliation, it would qualify
a party for recognition as a political status. He added that this
may or may not have any affect on the number of candidates that
appear on a ballot, but it might provide a major party an
opportunity to maintain its party status and not run a candidate
when it isn't serious about winning an election.
Number 140
SENATOR DUNCAN asked if under this new definition the Republican
Party, Democratic Party and the Alaska Independent Party could
retain party status without getting 3 percent of the vote in each
gubernatorial election year because of the number of registered
voters that they have. REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY responded that it is
his understanding that if this bill becomes law, those three
parties would have the option of how they wanted to maintain their
political status.
SENATOR DUNCAN asked if for any other party the only option would
be to have a gubernatorial candidate every four years and get at
least 3 percent of vote if they didn't have at least 10,000
registered voters. REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY answered that was not
correct. Right now groups of people that want to qualify as a
party have to run a candidate and garner 3 percent of the vote. If
this bill becomes law, an option would be that they could go out
and register voters equivalent to the same number.
Number 180
SENATOR MACKIE observed that this change makes it easier for
someone to get on a gubernatorial ballot. REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY
agreed, and said this is expanding the options available.
Number 200
JIM BALDWIN, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, stated
the legal issues brought up in this bill are substantial. He said
he suspects that if it becomes law it will provoke a lawsuit by one
of the major minor parties because of the differential treatment.
The Green Party, for example, is a recognized political party, and
the way the 3 percent works, they would not get the same treatment
as the Alaska Independent Party. They would not be able to sit out
the next gubernatorial election; they would have to run a candidate
in order to keep their recognized status in tact.
He said in order to sustain a differential treatment, the state is
going to be held to a very high standard of showing a governmental
interest, and he doesn't think that there has been a sufficient
record developed in the hearings that he has attended thus far
before the Legislature to support that kind of a governmental
interest.
Mr. Baldwin said the legislation appears to allow easier access to
the gubernatorial ballot, but its the manner in which the access is
granted that may raise some problems. For example, he is counsel
to the state on a case currently pending in the U.S. Supreme Court
having to do with the open primary. One of the issues raised is
does the state's open primary statute violate the freedom of
association under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution for
particularly a political party that wants to close its primary. He
noted the state has argued that political parties really don't mean
that much in Alaska because of the way our election laws are
established, and he thinks that if this law were to be enacted, it
would further bolster the state's arguments because the ability to
become recognized as a political party would be lessened.
Number 290
SENATOR MILLER commented that Mr. Baldwin had said that the only
option the Green Party would have was to run a candidate, but he
pointed out that they would have the second option of putting on a
massive registration drive and get the 3 percent. MR. BALDWIN
agreed, but he added that he thinks that presents another problem.
By using that as a second prong of the test to become a major
political party, what you are saying to the adherents of that
political party is that the only way you are going to be recognized
as a party is for you to declare openly your affiliation. He
thinks that if members of a political party could in court allege
by doing that they are being laid open to threats or intimidation
or coercion, the state will not be able to sustain that kind of a
requirement either.
Number 321
SENATOR MACKIE asked if the bill became law, an election was held,
and then there was a lawsuit and the state lost, does that mean the
whole election has to be voided. MR. BALDWIN replied that it would
be highly unlikely there would be a situation where a election
would be invalidated. The courts usually bend over backwards to
avoid that kind of result from happening, but it tends to lead to
a lot of uncertainty for the Division of Elections and a potential
for further problems with the electoral process.
SENATOR MACKIE inquired if Mr. Baldwin sees a solution that would
satisfy his legal concerns with this legislation. MR. BALDWIN
responded that there were some amendments that were proposed on the
House floor and in House Finance that would ameliorate a lot of
problems such as taking it down to 1 percent. He also said the
state has taken the strong position that it favors the open
primarily, and he thinks that what is done here as far as what
defines political party affects that case, and he suggested that
should be kept in mind.
There being no further testimony on CSHB 112(FIN), CHAIRMAN GREEN
stated the bill would be set aside.
Number 069
CSHB 112(FIN) AMEND DEFINITION OF "POLITICAL PARTY"
CHAIRMAN GREEN brought CSHB 112(FIN) back before the committee and
requested a motion on the legislation.
SENATOR MACKIE said he thinks the Department of Law has raised some
serious questions on this legislation that should be looked into by
the Attorney General.
SENATOR MILLER said he understands Senator Mackie's concern;
however, he does not believe the constitutional challenge is as
much a concern as Mr. Baldwin expressed it to be. He said it is
still the 3 percent, and nothing in the bill limits the party from
going out and doing an active registration drive so that they don't
have to run a candidate, or, if they want to continue to run a
candidate, they can do so.
SENATOR DUNCAN noted that the House Judiciary Committee had not
looked at this legislation, and he recommended that a Senate
Judiciary Committee referral be considered in addition to the
Senate Finance Committee. SENATOR MILLER related that after the
bill was passed out of the Sate Affairs Committee, he would get
together with Senator Taylor to discuss referring it to the Senate
Judiciary Committee.
Number 102
SENATOR MILLER moved CSHB 112(FIN) be passed out of committee with
individual recommendations. SENATOR DUNCAN objected. The roll was
taken with the following result: Senators Mackie, Ward, Miller and
Green voted "Yea" and Senator Duncan voted "Nay." The Chairman
stated the motion to move CSHB 112(FIN) out of committee carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|