Legislature(1997 - 1998)
05/06/1997 02:30 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
MAY 6, 1997
2:30 P.M.
TAPE HFC 97 - 124, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 97 - 124, Side 2, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 97 - 125, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 97 - 125, Side 2, #000 - #1670.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Gene Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 2:30 P.M.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring
Representative Davies Representative Martin
Representative Davis Representative Moses
Representative Foster Representative Mulder
Representative Grussendorf Representative Kelly
Representative Hanley was not present for the meeting.
ALSO PRESENT
George Dozier, Staff, Representative Pete Kott; Paul Grossi,
Director, Division of Workers' Compensation, Department of
Labor; James Armstrong, Staff, Senator Dave Donley; Dean
Guaneli, Chief, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal
Division, Department of Law; Anne Carpeneti, Assistant
Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law; Tim
Benintendi, Staff, Senator Tim Kelly; Tuckerman Babcock,
Staff, Senator Lyda Green; Marianne Burke, Director,
Division of Insurance, Department of Commerce and Economic
Development; Michael Lessmeier, State Farm Insurance,
Juneau; Carla Timpone, Alaska Women's Lobby, Juneau; Peter
Nakamura, MD, MPH, Director, Division of Public Health,
Department of Health and Social Services; Kristen Bomengen,
Assistant Attorney General, Human Services Section,
Department of Law; Nancy Weller, Division of Medical
Assistance, Department of Health and Social Services; Angela
Salerno, Executive Director, National Association of Social
Workers, Juneau; Lauree Hugonin, Executive Director, Alaska
Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, Juneau;
Arthur Snowden, Administrative Director, Office of the
Administrative Director, Alaska Court System; Jayne Andreen,
Director, Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault,
Anchorage.
SUMMARY
1
SB 70 An Act defining the offenses of unlawful discharge
of a firearm; and relating to the commission of
those offenses by minors.
HCS CS SB 70 (FIN) was reported out of Committee
with a "do pass" recommendation and with fiscal
notes by the Alaska Court System, the Department
of Administration dated 4/10/97, the Department of
Law dated 4/9/97, and zero fiscal notes by the
Department of Administration dated 4/10/97, the
Department of Corrections dated 4/10/97, the
Department of Public Safety dated 2/21/97 and the
Department of Health and Social Services dated
2/21/97.
SB 104 An Act relating to regulation and examination of
insurers and insurance agents; relating to kinds
of insurance; relating to payment of insurance
taxes and to required insurance reserves; relating
to insurance policies; relating to regulation of
capital, surplus, and investments by insurers;
relating to hospital and medical service
corporations; and providing for an effective date.
HCS CS SB 104 (FIN) was reported out of Committee
with a "do pass" recommendation and with fiscal
note by the Department of Revenue and a zero
fiscal note by the Department of Commerce and
Economic Development.
SB 141 An Act relating to permits to carry concealed
handguns; and relating to the possession of
firearms.
SB 141 was HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 116 An Act relating to workers' compensation
self-insurance.
CS HB 116 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual recommendations" and with fiscal notes
by the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development dated 4/25/97 and the Department of
Labor dated 4/25/97.
HB 234 An Act relating to assistance for abortions under
the general relief program; and relating to
financial responsibility for the costs of
abortions.
2
HB 234 was HELD in Committee for further
discussion. The bill was placed in Subcommittee
with Representative Kelly as Chair and with
members Representative Martin and Representative
J. Davies.
HOUSE BILL 234
"An Act relating to assistance for abortions under the
general relief program; and relating to financial
responsibility for the costs of abortions."
REPRESENTATIVE TERRY MARTIN explained that HB 234 would
provide a new measure of logic and consistency to the
State's abortion law in two areas; first, in establishing
the procedure's priority on the official list of medical
procedures the State will pay for under the General Relief
Medical (GRM) program; and second, by creating a mechanism
by which the State can identify and hold financially
responsible the would-be father. He added, it is not
logical that an elective procedure such as an abortion
should continue to hold a higher priority to other more
essential services.
HB 234 would have the State require payment from the
pregnant woman, either partially or in full, for an elective
abortion if it had been paid for under the General Relief
Medical Program. HB 234 would require that the male
responsible for the pregnancy be identified and held
financially responsible for an abortion sought under the
General Relief Medical Program. Currently, under Title 47,
the State requires a woman seeking financial assistance from
the State to identify the father or her dependent children.
The State then recovers any costs it can from the father
through the Child Support Enforcement Division.
Representative Martin thought that it was logical that if a
father of a born child should reimburse the State, so should
the father of an unborn child.
Representative Martin pointed out that HB 234 would
represent a new bench mark in requiring accountable parties
to accept the full responsibility for their actions. If we
are to continue to have a policy in Alaska of publicly-
funded abortion, Representative Martin stressed that the
State should do all it can to collect from the responsible
persons.
PETER NAKAMURA, M.D., MPH, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF PUBLIC
HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, noted that
the Department strongly opposes the proposed legislation.
He indicated that the bill would be harmful, speaking to the
historical problems during the times when there was no
3
medical access to abortion. Hospital rooms were then
responsible for addressing the "back yard" results of self
induced abortions. At this time, any abortion procedure is
safer than a normal delivery. He asserted that to remove
access to the services, would force the State back into the
"dark ages".
KRISTEN BOMENGEN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, HUMAN SERVICES
SECTION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, spoke to the constitutional
issues raised by the legislation. The effect of the bill
would eliminate abortion funding which raises a
constitutional inquiry. If the funding was restored to the
relief medical services spectrum, it would give rise to a
subsequent constitutional issue requiring that the woman
reveal the name of her sexual partner in order to receive
the service.
Section 3 of the bill separates out abortion services from
all other pregnancy related services and places it into the
list of items eliminated from funding. Ms. Bomengen pointed
out that to date, the Alaska State Courts have not addressed
abortion issues directly. In other states which have
explicate privacy protection, provide for pregnancy related
services in a constitutionally neutral manner.
She noted that it was the Department of Law's belief that
the effect of the legislation's language would place
impermissible burdens upon a woman's option to choose to
terminate the pregnancy.
She continued, if funding was fully restored for all general
relief services, or if a constitutional challenge was
required for the State to offer all pregnancy related
services equally, at that time, Section 2 of the bill would
be addressed. That section provides that the woman name the
sexual partner in order to receive medical services from the
State. The Department understands that the woman's choice
not to provide the name of her sexual partner is a protected
right. There are many reasons that a woman would not want
to have the name released. In response to Representative
Kelly's request, Ms. Bomengen explained that the male
involved often needs to be sought in order to be identified.
Ms. Bomengen provided some reasons why a woman would choose
not to identify the male partner. Co-Chair Therriault
advised that the State provides the funds for the service
and has the right to recoup those costs. Ms. Bomengen
agreed that the State does have the right to recoup costs as
established in the bill. However, given the cost of the
procedure, the State would be able to recoup their cost
solely through the woman's permanent fund check. Given the
4
current value of that check, the State would have recouped
costs from the woman's check. Requiring her to reveal
information that she may not wish to reveal, could result in
constitutional problems.
Discussion followed between Representative Martin and Ms.
Bomengen regarding the number of other states which pay for
abortions. Ms. Bomengen agreed that all states are not
constitutionally required to pay for an abortion. The State
can not discourage the right to exercise a constitutional
right based on religious or moral hostility.
Co-Chair Therriault asked how the father's dividend check
would be accessed. Ms. Bomengen stated that in most cases,
the procedure would be paid for by the woman's permanent
fund check.
Representative Martin countered that procedure should be
similar to the one used by the Child Support Enforcement
Agency (CSEA) and would be done at the time of delivery.
Representative Martin thought this action would provide an
incentive to the Department of Health and Social Services
(DHSS).
Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that even though the bill
recommends pursuing both the man and woman, there would be
no need to go past the woman. Representative Kelly
suggested that an amendment be added to the bill which would
clarify that the both parents be equally responsible,
whereas, if the mother chose not to identify the father,
then she remain singularly responsible for payment.
NANCY WELLER, DIVISION OF MEDICAL ASSISTANCE, DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, stated that Section 3 of HB 234
would eliminate the Department's ability to fund abortions
for low income women. Since 1986, the Department has not
funded any services beyond the current number #7.
She addressed the concerns of the Department. The
Department would take action against the woman and collect
her permanent fund dividend for the abortion costs. Of the
people who apply for the Medicaid program, most recipients
are eligible for Medicaid. Those who receive abortions
under the General Relief Medical (GRM) program, do not have
to identify the father of the child until the child is born.
The person could be required, under a condition of receiving
funding for an abortion, to assign the rights to their
permanent fund dividend check to the State or ask them to
identify the father of the unborn child. That would be
costly for the Department and would require deep tissue
testing. The cost for the testing in the State of Alaska is
5
$975 dollars. Many areas of the State do not do DNA
testing. Also, there is no statewide authority to compel a
father to comply with the testing. Ms. Weller agreed that
it was a compelling idea to have the father take part in the
administrative costs, although, reiterated that it is not a
sound idea or financially feasible. The bill provides
authority to take action on the cost of the abortion, but
does not cover the administrative costs associated with
establishing paternity.
Representative Kelly asked the connection between federal
Medicaid, Medicare and State funded abortion dollars. Ms.
Weller replied that most women that receive funding for
abortion through the General Relief Program (GRP) are
Medicaid recipients. There is no link between federal and
state dollars.
Representative Martin spoke to the priorities of the
services funded and suggested that by eliminating abortions
would provide more funding for other emergency services.
Ms. Weller advised that those are two different programs and
services. The State spends about $300 thousand dollars on
GRM abortions annually, whereas, the cost of adult emergency
care is close to $4 million dollars. She emphasized that
these are two different programs and the money can not be
used for the alternate program.
ANGELA SALERNO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SOCIAL WORKERS, JUNEAU, spoke in strong opposition to the
proposed legislation. HB 234 would virtually eliminate the
availability of abortion services for one class of
individuals in the State, poor women. If the services are
eliminated, there will be unintended outcomes. The options
would be restricted for poor women. There are many
unintended pregnancies each year. There will also be
increased costs to the State with the fetal testing. And
also, assuming the cost of Medicaid and welfare for those
children. She stressed that when children are unwanted in a
family, much more recorded child abuse and neglect exists.
CARLA TIMPONE, ALASKA WOMEN'S LOBBY, JUNEAU, testified in
opposition to the proposed legislation. The Lobby's
concerns are specific to three areas:
* Related to gender equity;
* Related to class issues; and
* Related to singling out one elective
procedure as opposed to another.
(Tape Change HFC 97-124, Side 2).
Representative Kelly pointed out that the bill does not make
6
a statement about an individual's position on abortion;
rather, it is only a statement about funding abortion.
Co-Chair Therriault placed HB 234 in Subcommittee with
Representative Kelly as Chair and with members
Representative Martin and Representative J. Davies. He
asked that the Subcommittee address the following concerns:
* The amendment provided by Representative
Martin;
* The issue of addressing the identify of the
father in the situation;
* Any constitutional issues which need
addressing by the Department of Law; and
* How to compel a man/father to participate in
the actual paternity and potential
responsibility.
HB 234 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
HOUSE BILL 116
"An Act relating to workers' compensation
self-insurance."
GEORGE DOZIER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, noted that
HB 116 contained numerous substantive and procedural
requirements designed to ensure that worker's compensation
self-insurance groups remain fiscally sound and able to
fulfill Alaska's workers compensation requirements.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to adopt Amendment #1. [Copy on
file].
PAUL GROSSI, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION,
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, advised that the Department would
support Amendment #1.
Mr. Dozier explained that Amendment #1 would impose a duty
of care which would be exercised by the trustees of the
groups created by the bill and would be a standard level of
care.
MARIANNE BURKE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INSURANCE, DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, commented that the
Department supports Amendment #1 which would address a
concern regarding investment criteria for excessive money
and how it would be handled. There being NO OBJECTION,
Amendment #1 was adopted.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to adopt Amendment #2. [Copy on
file]. Discussion followed regarding Amendment #2.
7
[Temporary tape malfunction for five minutes].
Mr. Grossi noted that funding would be needed within the
group and that there should be included a safety net to pay
claims should the group fail. He suggested that it would be
essential to place liquid assets inside the group in order
to properly fund the initial stage of the revenue stream and
the safety protection at that end. Insurance requirements
for an insurance company is $1.75 million dollars.
Representative J. Davies asked if the director had the
authority to control the amount. He believed that if they
don't have adequate insurance, they shouldn't be in
business. Mr. Grossi replied that in order for it to be
affordable for the size of the group, there would need to be
a high enough retention self insurance. Representative J.
Davies believed that the amounts should be self regulating.
Ms. Burke pointed out that through Department research,
similar organizations typically have $200-$500 thousand
dollars in a retention fund, critical to the organization.
Representative J. Davies questioned how the numbers were
determined. Ms. Burke pointed out that they had been
provided in the proposed legislation. In order to become
established, they must have a minimum of a $500 thousand
dollars premium for the year, of which they need 25% of that
cost to begin. The 25% is broken down between the
administrative and claims portion. She noted that it was
her intent that the system work while at the same time,
protecting the workers. That is why an alternative funding
source has been proposed and would require money up-front.
Representative Kohring MOVED to report CS HB 116 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 116 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual recommendations" and with fiscal notes by the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development dated
4/25/97 and the Department of Labor dated 4/25/97.
SENATE BILL 70
"An Act defining the offenses of unlawful discharge of
a firearm; and relating to the commission of those
offenses by minors."
JAMES ARMSTRONG, STAFF, SENATOR DAVE DONLEY, explained that
SB 70 would provide strong new deterrents to individuals who
8
unlawfully discharge firearms at buildings or dwellings.
Last year, an Anchorage family was awakened in the middle of
the night to a barrage of gunfire. The next day, the
Anchorage Police Department found five bullets lodged in
various locations of the family's home. Juneau has
witnessed seven separate accounts of shootings at dwellings
in the last year alone. Under current State law, the
unlawful discharge of a firearm at a building is only a
misdemeanor.
SB 70 would create a new class B felony offense for the
unlawful discharge of a firearm at a dwelling. The
legislation would also create a class B felony offense for
discharging a firearm in the direction of a building with
reckless disregard of risk of physical injury to a person.
It would also address the problem of random reckless
discharges of firearms by instituting tough new penalties on
those individuals who not only endanger property but
innocent lives as well.
Mr. Armstrong explained that the work draft would add intent
language to Section 1. Representative J. Davies recommended
discussion by the Department of Law addressing the changes
made to the work draft.
ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, testified that there is legal
justification contained in the criminal code and that
removal of the proposed language would not be in conflict
with that criteria. The language is not necessary as the
legal justification applies to all statutes.
Representative Martin MOVED that work draft, 0-LS0272\C,
Luckhaupt, 5/5/97, be the version before the Committee.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Representative Martin MOVED to report HCS CSSB 70 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HCS CS SB 70 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with fiscal notes by the Alaska
Court System, the Department of Administration dated
4/10/97, the Department of Law dated 4/9/97, and zero fiscal
notes by the Department of Administration dated 4/10/97, the
Department of Corrections dated 4/10/97, the Department of
Public Safety dated 2/21/97 and the Department of Health and
Social Services dated 2/21/97.
SENATE BILL 104
9
"An Act relating to regulation and examination of
insurers and insurance agents; relating to kinds of
insurance; relating to payment of insurance taxes and
to required insurance reserves; relating to insurance
policies; relating to regulation of capital, surplus,
and investments by insurers; relating to hospital and
medical service corporations; and providing for an
effective date."
TIM BENINTENDI, STAFF, SENATOR TIM KELLY, stated that the
bill was requested by the Division of Insurance and contains
numerous provisions that will enhance the effectiveness,
efficiency and quality of insurance regulations for the
Alaskan consumer and industry. The majority of the
provisions implement the minimum federal standards for
individual and group health insurance plans as established
under the federal Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 which will become effective in
Alaska by July 1, 1997. If the provisions are not enacted
in this legislative session, the federal Department of
Health and Human Services will take over regulations of
these standards in individual and group health insurance
markets in Alaska.
Mr. Benintendi provided a summary of the federal minimum
standards in the bill:
* In August 1996, the 1996 Act was signed into
federal law. The Act received wide
bipartisan support in Congress and by many
organizations including the American Medical
Association (AMA).
* Federal law establishes minimum standards for
all individual and group health care plans
which must become effective July 1, 1997.
These standards ensure that health coverage
is portable, available and renewable for many
individuals.
* If Alaska fails to enact the federal reforms
or otherwise, provides for enforcement of the
federal reforms, the federal government will
enforce compliance in Alaska beginning
January 1, 1998.
* Alaska has the option to implement an
alternative to the minimum individual health
insurance standards in federal law. This
legislation would provide for the necessary
amendments to the insurance code to implement
10
such an alternative as well as other
amendments necessary to implement the minimum
group reforms.
* The bill would provide for a federally
acceptable alternative by modifying the
eligibility requirements for the
Comprehensive Health Insurance Association
(CHIA). This alternative would be the least
disruptive to Alaska's small individual
health insurance market.
Mr. Benintendi commented that Amendment #1, 0-LS0407\KA.4,
Ford, 5/5/97, was a refinement of an amendment provided on
the Senate floor to improve the legislation's intention.
[Copy on file]. He commented that Senator Kelly supports
the amendment.
Ms. Burke advised that the issue is currently before the
Alaska Supreme Court and involves contradictory federal
decisions. The federal court remanded it to the State
Supreme Court. The amendment would remove the ambiguity
which lead to the case and would clarify the intent.
(Tape Change HFC 97-125, Side 1).
MICHAEL LESSMEIER, STATE FARM INSURANCE, JUNEAU, agreed that
there exists a controversy about when the underinsured
motorist coverage is triggered. The policy decision made by
Senator Donley is reflected in Amendment #1. He believed
that the consideration is a complicated issue.
Representative Martin MOVED to adopt Amendment #1. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Mr. Lessmeier spoke to a concern regarding that the
maintenance of records provision being held for ten years,
Page 5, Line 31. He pointed out that this is longer than
any other state in the country. He requested it be changed
to five years. Ms. Burke responded that all domestic
insurers in the State of Alaska are required to keep their
records ten years. She added that the Division would have
no objection to changing it to five years. Mr. Benintendi
noted that the sponsor would not object to that change.
Representative Martin MOVED that language change on Page 5,
Line 31, deleting "ten years" and inserting "five years".
There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Representative Martin MOVED to report HCS CS SB 104 (FIN)
out of Committee with individual recommendations and with
the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it
11
was so ordered.
HCS CS SB 104 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a fiscal note by the
Department of Revenue and the Department of Commerce and
Economic Development.
SENATE BILL 141
"An Act relating to permits to carry concealed
handguns; and relating to the possession of firearms."
TUCKERMAN BABCOCK, STAFF, SENATOR LYDA GREEN, commented that
the intent of SB 141 is simple. There is no reason that the
permitted few should be more restricted than the unregulated
many. He suggested treating people and their handguns
equally. All Alaskans, who are not otherwise prohibited by
federal or state law from owning or possessing handguns, can
carry handguns openly in certain places and can carry
concealed without a permit in certain places. An Alaskan
should be able to carry a concealed handgun in those same
places, and should be required to do no more than
fingerprinting, training and background checks.
Mr. Babcock noted that with the exception of the recognition
of out-of-state permits and the lowering of the permit fee,
the Alaska Peace Officers Association supports SB 141. The
Department of Public Safety (DPS) supports most of the bill,
although, opposes certain sections. The Department contends
that without an increase in volume, reducing fees could
result in not collecting enough funds to cover the costs of
the program. The Department remains opposed to recognizing
out-of-state permits and are definitely cautious about
changing the law.
Mr. Babcock summarized that existing law is too restrictive,
confusing and expensive. Under current law, one is
prohibited from walking into a financial institution with a
permitted concealed handgun, but is allowed to take the
handgun out and carry it openly into the bank. He suggested
that existing law too often turns common sense upside down.
Representative J. Davies spoke to his philosophy regarding
the proposed legislation. He believed that concealed
weapons should be prohibited in a bank with only open-carry
allowed. Mr. Babcock commented that the people who apply
for permits to carry concealed guns are not the ones that
commit crimes with those weapons. If a person's intent was
to cause damage in a bank, they would not be concerned with
carrying a permit or not.
Representative Kelly questioned under the proposed bill,
12
would a person be allowed to carry a concealed weapon into a
bar. Mr. Babcock stated that would not be allowed.
Representative G. Davis argued against the statement that
people who obtain a permit to carry concealed are all
upstanding citizens. He stressed that there has not been
enough study regarding that statement. Representative Kelly
countered that history from other states does indicate these
positive results.
Representative Mulder questioned the fee structure changes
recommended by the sponsor. Mr. Babcock replied that the
current fee structure is up to $125 dollars for the initial
permit and $60 for renewal after five years. Senator Green
is proposing to reduce that to $99 dollars for the initial
cost and $30 dollars for renewal. The course would cost
between $100 to $150 dollars. If the volume were to
increase, the Department of Public Safety would be able to
meet their target with the amount of money that would be
generated from the $99 dollar fee. The fixed cost to the
Department is roughly $60 dollars.
LAUREE HUGONIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA NETWORK ON
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT, JUNEAU, voiced her
concern that the Network opposes three sections of the bill;
Section #10, #13 and #16.
She noted that the current list of permit qualifications
excludes persons who have committed felonies and a various
list of misdemeanors including crimes against a person and a
crime involving domestic violence. She stressed that if the
bill passes in it's current form, it would remove that
restriction. The Network strongly opposes that action.
Section #13 addresses when a permit could be suspended and
would be when there has been a crime charged against a
person or a crime involving domestic violence. A person at
that point could have been charged with a crime even though
they had not been convicted. Ms. Hugonin testified that it
would be appropriate to suspend a permit in certain
circumstances. She urged that current statute stand.
Section #16 repeals and reenacts a list of prohibitive
places to carry concealed. A facility that provides
services to domestic violence and sexual assault victims was
not included, even though not listed in the crime section,
she stressed that it is a locked facility. If the person
carries concealed, the option to deny entrance is not
available.
Ms. Hugonin refuted the notion that people in domestic
violence centers and those that work there are "sitting
ducks". She emphasized that these places are homes of
13
refuge. Places where skills of dialogue, negotiation,
fairness, truth-telling and sharing are practiced. Because
the Network works to carry out this vision, does not mean
that they ignore the real world. Employees at the shelters
teach victims to learn how to arm themselves with knowledge,
companions and with the belief in the possibility and
willingness to stand for peace.
She requested that weapons not be allowed on the shelters
premise and that request be respected and clearly specified
in law.
Discussion followed regarding Section #13 between
Representative Mulder and Ms. Hugonin. Mr. Babcock noted
that Committee members packet included a memo dated 3/24/97,
from Legal Counsel to Senator Green, stating that it should
be unlawful for any person to possess a fire arm, who is
subject to a court order. The sponsor's position is that
federal law already prohibits those people from possessing
any firearms. Ms. Hugonin replied that there are some
federal provisions which are not as expansive as the
Domestic Violence Protection Act passed last year. That
protective order included in the Alaska Statutes includes
emergency protective orders. Federal law does not cover
those, while defining who is eligible to obtain a protective
order in a more narrow field.
(Tape Change HFC 97-125, Side 2).
Mr. Babcock spoke to the broad federal laws preclusion list
of firearms. He pointed out that AS 11.61.200(a)(8)
prohibits the possession of a fire arm while a person is
committing a trespass in the first or second degree
violation of the domestic violence restraining order and
that AS 11.61.200(a)(9) prohibits the possession of any
firearm concealed or open while the possessor is
communicating with another person in violation of their
domestic restraining order.
JAYNE ANDREEN, DIRECTOR, COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND
SEXUAL ASSAULT, ANCHORAGE, expressed concerns that the
Council has on SB 141. She pointed out that the Legislature
and the Administration worked very hard three years ago to
craft a concealed handgun system which contained adequate
safeguards. There have been no problems with that system to
date.
Ms. Andreen spoke to the specific areas which the Council
has addressed concerns with in the proposed legislation:
* Protection for domestic violence and sexual
assault victims needs to be paramount and
14
under the eligibility qualifications. The
Council is concerned that the prohibition on
a protective order has been jeopardized under
federal law;
* Under the eligibility list, someone under the
bill would have had to be convicted of two
class A misdemeanors in order to be eligible
for a concealed handgun permit. That would
exclude the mass majority of domestic violent
offenders.
* The prohibition of concealed handguns in
domestic violence sexual assault facilities.
Ms. Andreen pointed out that we need to acknowledge that
some domestic violence and sexual assault victims are very
proficient at use of handguns. The reality is that many of
these victims do not have that level of proficiency.
Additionally, there are many other adults and children in
these facilities. To date, there has been an assurance that
these facilities have emergency procedures. She stressed
that it is very important to use the criminal justice
system, use a safety process to enforce safety for these
victims.
Ms. Andreen requested the Committee to consider banning all
guns from these facilities, both openly carried and
concealed.
ARTHUR SNOWDEN, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COURT
SYSTEM, advised that the Supreme Court feels strongly that
an amendment be added to the bill which would ban all
firearms from court facilities. Federal law does ban them
from federal court houses. Mr. Snowden stressed the highly
emotionally charged environment that exists in a court room
situation and that the bill needs to be amended to address
these concerns.
Representative Kohring stated that the procedure of those
persons in going through the permitting process should
present minimal problems for the court system. Mr. Snowden
respectfully disagreed. He reiterated that court houses are
highly charged emotional environments.
Representative Martin questioned if courts houses had a
court ruling pertaining to the expressed concern. Mr.
Snowden replied that the court does have a ruling against
concealed weapons. Although, citizens are not charged by
law with knowing or obeying court rule, but they are charged
by law with knowing the statues and laws of the State. He
15
reiterated that we need to ban firearms by law from being
carried in court houses.
DEAN GUANELI, CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, explained that there are
problems with the bill which need to be addressed by the
Finance Committee. Those problems fall into two areas:
* Current law establishes a list of classes of
people who can not get concealed handgun
permits. The legislation would sweep away
that protection.
* Current law also contains a long list of
places where concealed handguns can not be
carried, which the bills disregards.
Mr. Guaneli focused on some of the provisions which are
being repealed by the bill. He agreed with Mr. Snowden's
idea of banning all kinds of protection in court houses, and
the type of ultimate protection that domestic violence
shelters and places that provide services to victims would
really need. He suggested that any amendment dealing with
court houses should also include an additional line taking
into consideration where services are added to victims of
domestic violence and sexual assault.
He suggested that the classes of people who can not get
concealed handguns are important to remain in current law.
Current law states that someone who is suffering from a
mental illness can not get a concealed handgun permit.
Federal law states that if you have been adjudicated or
institutionalized, you can not carry a fire arm. There are
many people walking the streets who are quite paranoid who
are law abiding citizens yet are crazy. Those people under
the proposed legislation could receive a permit.
At this time, the Department of Public Safety will receive
an application from someone who otherwise looks like a
perfect applicant, and then they will receive letters from
the community indicating the marginal ability of these
people to be capable of having a permit responsibly. This
type of protection does not exist in federal law and must
exist in State law.
Mr. Guaneli addressed other specifications such as people
who had been ordered by the court into alcohol
rehabilitation within the last three years. Those people
should not be carrying a concealed handgun. Federal law
does not speak to serious alcoholics; federal law only
addresses someone who is addicted or a user of a controlled
substance.
16
Mr. Guaneli noted that if there is going to be a great
expansion of the places where concealed handguns are
displayed under permit, there needs to be an amendment under
the State Criminal Trespass laws to give public buildings
and premises the same rights as private places.
Representative J. Davies requested more clarification under
current trespass laws. Mr. Guaneli responded that current
law stipulates that a sign would be effective to prohibit
trespassing activities. Representative J. Davies asked if
the proposed bill would affect current law with respect to
private property. Mr. Guaneli stated it would not affect
any of the criminal trespass laws.
Representative Kelly MOVED to adopt Amendment #1. [Copy on
file]. Representative Kohring OBJECTED.
Representative Kelly reiterated that the court room was a
charged environment and that concealed handguns should not
be allowed. Mr. Babcock retorted that currently under the
law, carrying openly or concealed in a court house is
prohibitive. A person would be thrown in jail by the court
system for contempt of court. Since it is already written
into law, he urged that addition of the language would be
redundant.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Grussendorf, Kelly, Mulder, J. Davies,
G. Davis, Foster
OPPOSED: Kohring
Representatives Martin, Moses, Therriault and Hanley were
not present for the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (6-1).
SB 141 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:40 P.M.
17
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|