HJR 3 - CONST. AM: NO GAMING WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL 1:23:31 PM CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 3, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska requiring an affirmative vote of the people before any form of gambling for profit may be authorized in Alaska and setting other requirements. 1:23:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE HARRY CRAWFORD, Alaska State Legislature, as one of joint prime sponsors of HJR 3, noted that legislation similar to HJR 3 had passed the [House] during the prior legislature, and surmised that all committee members have had a chance to hear it at one point or another. He opined that Alaska couldn't afford an excursion into for-profit gambling. REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM, speaking as one of joint prime sponsors of HJR 3, concurred, and opined that gambling contributes to the disintegration of families, as well as many other ills such as crime and corruption. In conclusion, she requested that the committee vote in favor of moving HJR 3 out of committee. REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD, in response to a question, indicated that the language of HJR 3 is identical to that of the legislation [that passed the House last year]. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN expressed strong support for HJR 3. REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL suggested that requiring a vote of the people, should HJR 3 first be approved by the voters, would be a good way to continue the discussion regarding whether a community wants to allow [for-profit] gambling. REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD, in response to a question, explained that a past ballot initiative proposing the establishment of a gambling commission would have taken the decision regarding whether to have for-profit gambling in Alaska out of the hands of both the legislature and the voters and would have instead placed the decision in the hands of a five-member commission that could have acted with only three members present. This is such an important decision, he asserted, that the legislature, the governor, and the communities and people of the state ought to have a say in it. He characterized that past ballot initiative as an attempted end-run around the legislature because it had blocked the formation of such a commission in the past, and characterized [HJR 3 as promoting] more democracy. CHAIR RAMRAS, after ascertaining that no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HJR 3. 1:29:28 PM REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to report HJR 3 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HJR 3 was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.