Legislature(1997 - 1998)
05/10/1998 02:26 PM House RLS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RULES STANDING COMMITTEE
May 10, 1998
2:26 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Pete Kott, Chairman
Representative Gail Phillips
Representative Brian Porter
Representative William K.(Bill) Williams
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Al Vezey
Representative Kim Elton
Representative Irene Nicholia
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 42(FIN)
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
relating to marriage.
- MOVED HCSCSSJR 42(RLS) FORWARD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SJR 42
SHORT TITLE: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT RE MARRIAGE
SPONSOR(S): HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
3/02/98 2701 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
3/02/98 2701 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
3/09/98 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
3/09/98 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
3/10/98 2807 (S) JUD RPT CS 4DP 1DNP SAME TITLE
3/10/98 2807 (S) DP: TAYLOR, PARNELL, MILLER, PEARCE
3/10/98 2807 (S) DNP: ELLIS
3/10/98 2807 (S) FISCAL NOTE TO SJR & CS (GOV)
3/24/98 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
3/31/98 (S) FIN AT 1:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532
3/31/98 (S) FIN AT 7:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532
4/01/98 (S) FIN AT 7:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
4/02/98 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
4/06/98 3158 (S) FIN RPT CS 5DP 1DNP 1NR SAME TITLE
4/06/98 3158 (S) DP: SHARP, PHILLIPS, PARNELL, DONLEY,
4/06/98 3158 (S) TORGERSON; DNP: ADAMS; NR: PEARCE
4/06/98 3158 (S) PREVIOUS FN APPLIES (GOV)
4/08/98 (S) RLS AT 11:20 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203
4/08/98 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
4/16/98 3294 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 1NR 4/16/98
4/16/98 3297 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
4/16/98 3298 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
4/16/98 3298 (S) AM NO 1 FAILED Y4 N16
4/16/98 3299 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING Y15 N5
4/16/98 3300 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSJR 42(FIN)
4/16/98 3300 (S) PASSED Y14 N6
4/16/98 3300 (S) ADAMS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
4/17/98 3334 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING
4/17/98 3334 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y14 N6
4/17/98 3346 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
4/18/98 3071 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
4/18/98 3071 (H) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
4/27/98 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
4/27/98 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
4/30/98 3360 (H) JUD RPT 4DP 1DNP
4/30/98 3360 (H) DP: GREEN, PORTER, ROKEBERG, JAMES;
4/30/98 3360 (H) DNP: CROFT
4/30/98 3360 (H) SENATE FISCAL NOTE (GOV) 3/10/98
5/04/98 (H) FIN AT 8:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE 519
5/05/98 3518 (H) FIN RPT 6DP
5/05/98 3518 (H) DP: THERRIAULT, HANLEY, MULDER,
MARTIN,
5/05/98 3518 (H) DAVIS, KELLY
5/05/98 3518 (H) SENATE FISCAL NOTE (GOV) 3/10/98
5/08/98 3657 (H) WITHDRAW FROM CMTE FLD Y1 N34 A5
5/09/98 3704 (H) RULES TO CALENDAR 5/9/98
5/09/98 3704 (H) RETURN TO RULES
5/10/98 (H) RLS AT 2:00 PM SPEAKER'S CHAMBER
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR LOREN LEMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 113
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3844
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented CSSJR 42(FIN).
CHARLES NORTHRIP
2810 Fritz Cove Road
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 789-3554
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HCSCSSJR 42(RLS).
PAM NORTHRIP
2810 Fritz Cove Road
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 789-3554
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HCSCSSJR 42(RLS).
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-12, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT called the House Rules Standing Committee
meeting to order at 2:26 p.m. Members present at the call to order
were Representatives Kott, Phillips, Porter and Williams.
CSSJR 42(FIN) - CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT RE MARRIAGE
Number 0018
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced the committee would address CSSJR 42(FIN),
"Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
relating to marriage," sponsored by the Senate Health, Education
and Social Services (HESS) Committee. He noted there a proposed
committee substitute.
Number 0030
REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS moved that the committee adopt
HCSCSSJR 42(RLS), Version K, dated 5/10/98. There being no
objection, HCSCSSJR 42(RLS) was before the committee.
CHAIRMAN KOTT explained the change is on page 1, lines 9 through
11. The words, "The legislature may enact additional requirements
related to marriage to the extent permitted by the Constitution of
the United States and this constitution," have been deleted. He
said, "It is my belief that this is language that is probably not
needed as the legislature can take action based on constitutional
provisions that's put forth to the public, if it goes to a vote,
and incorporated into our state constitution. So it's probably
extraneous information that's probably not necessary. So it's more
of a clean up provision than anything else."
Number 152
SENATOR LOREN LEMAN came before the committee. He explained he
doesn't have an objection to removing the language, but would like
to testify as to why the language was included. Senator Leman
explained that the state has a legitimate interest in establishing
some requirements for marriage, though be it very few. One of the
requirements that deals with blood quantum if children can be
produced from that marriage. That is one that is of legitimate
interest because of genetics. Senator Leman said he wants to make
it very clear that there is an interest there that by taking it
out, the language does not, in any way, infringe on the state's
right to be able to do that. He said, "Another one is age and
children below a certain age, I don't know what it is, I think it's
16, that can't marry and that's another legitimate one. There also
is, I believe, either residency or time in the state - there is a
certain amount of time for administrative purposes. The state has
certain rules regarding getting married."
SENATOR LEMAN stated, "The opponents of this were likely to distort
this to mean something other than what was intended, but it really
was meant to address what Judge Michalski, in his decision, came
back and said that when he found that choice of a life partner was
so fundamental that he said, 'Government intrusion into the choice
of a life partner encroaches on the intimate personal decisions of
the individual. This, the constitution does not allow unless the
state can show a compelling interest in necessitating the
embridgement (ph) of the constitutionally protected right.' We
just wanted to avoid cases where the state was going to have to
show a compelling state interest and things like that. Taking it
out actually makes the amendment much easier to read. I believe it
enhances the support and when it goes on the ballot to the voter,
they want to be able to understand the amendment far better. And
so I'd encourage the committee to support the amendment, as
amended."
Number 0422
CHARLES NORTHRIP came before the committee to testify on the
proposed committee substitute. He said he believes the amendment
has the effect of making the resolution that remains even more
discriminatory than it was in the previous version. He said it now
clearly targets only one segment of the population. Mr. Northrip
said as Senator Leman pointed out, it makes it very clear what the
resolution now attempts to do. Mr. Northrip said what is left of
the resolution after this amendment is indeed very clear, and that
the violence and hate that could come from the kind of statewide
publicity campaign that will (indisc.) from this decision, be
something that he doesn't want to revisit. Mr. Northrip, referring
to growing up in the segregated South, said he was convinced that
the white man was superior and had to come to Alaska to find out
that all people are the same and deserve the same treatment under
the laws. The resolution is a bad way to go.
Number 0653
PAM NORTHRIP came before the committee to testify. She said "I
have lived in Alaska since statehood in 1959. My parents raised me
in the church and I raised my children in the church. We believed
in family values, truthfulness, kindness, treating others as we
would be treated.
MS. NORTHRIP continued "I have three wonderful children. They
entered the world with different physical appearances, different
personalities from the beginning, different gifts. They are merit
scholars, Truman scholars, a youth deacon, Sunday school teacher,
equestrian, debater. All three pay taxes. One is an actress, one
is a choir member. Which of my three children should have fewer
rights than the others because one of my children is gay.
MS. NORTHRIP explained, "The proposed amendment to SJR 42 does
nothing to change the tenor of this bill. In fact, I agree it
makes it very clear that this is a 'anti-gay' bill. Similar bills
in Colorado and Oregon have gone on the ballot and have given tacit
permission for an increase in hate crimes against homosexuals by
implying that there is some question that all citizens are equal
under the law and that is something that we, the public, can vote
on. I have trusted our constitution to protect the rights of the
minority, even when those may not be the choice of the majority.
We have seen throughout history what that has done to minority
races, to women, to immigrants.
MS. NORTHRIP continued, "My 16-year old daughter has already been
harassed at the high school simply for having the tenacity to love
and support her brother and to say so openly. I have always prized
being an Alaskan, and the freedoms recognized by out state. This
matter is currently before courts and there is a joint resolution
by the Senate and the House asking them to deal with this in a
timely fashion. I would ask that you let the courts finish this.
This is something that can be revisited at a later time if that is
not a satisfactory resolution. And I fear what would happen if we
put on the ballot an issue that asks the majority to vote on the
rights of any minority. It is a slippery slope, I fear for my
family, my children and the people of Alaska if SJR 42 goes on the
ballot. Thank you."
Number 0945
CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated there were no further witnesses to testify
and closed public hearing.
CHAIRMAN KOTT said, "Some (indisc.) believe that we are somewhat
just taking out language that is probably not necessary, but I
think with the amendment, it opens perhaps a Pandora's box. It
gives the legislature (indisc.) to give the legislature a little
more power than I think what the original intent of the resolution
was. That's why it came back to us with this proposal which, I
think, makes it clearer that we're not trying to expand anything
beyond what's in the original content of the resolution. But also
understanding that the legislature has that authority to create and
establish laws that conform to our U.S. Constitution (indisc.)."
Number 1048
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER stated, "Mr. Chairman, I guess for the
record, my impression of what we have just done was to make clear,
as testimony was indicating. What the intent of this is to
preclude, as state statute now provides in every other state in the
Union provides, that marriage between two people of the same sex is
not recognized by this state or any other state. The other
language can only be interpreted by both sides as giving too much
authority whether you are in favor of this proposition or against
it. So taking it out, I think, is appropriate and leaving this
single issue we are being asked to vote on."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to move HCSCSSJR 42, Version K,
out of the House Rules Committee with individual recommendation and
with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection,
HCSCSSJR 42(RLS) moved forward.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1203
CHAIRMAN KOTT adjourned the House Rules Standing Committee at 2:38
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|