HB 5 - VOUCHER SYSTEM FOR EDUCATION CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON introduced the first order of business as Sponsor Substitute for House Bill No. 5, "An Act relating to vouchers for education; and providing for an effective date." There were no objections to hearing SSHB 5 before the Association of Alaska School Board report. The opinion from the Office of the Attorney General had just been received a few hours ago. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said while the Health, Education and Social Services (HES) Committee is not a judiciary body, he recommended that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee request this bill to hear testimony on its legality. Number 0330 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to move SSHB 5 from committee with individual recommendations on the premise that the Judiciary Committee hear it. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said there needs to be educational accountability established in SSHB 5, otherwise they would be remiss in any type of action outside of the constitutional issue. He asked when the committee would have a mark up on this piece of legislation. Number 0450 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN added beyond the issue of the constitutionality, there are substantive weaknesses which must be addressed before this committee allows it to leave. REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER asked whether there will be an opportunity to offer amendments. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said it is in order to say the motion on the floor should be defeated because there are members of the committee who want to make some amendments. Number 0525 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said if there is a desire to mark up the bill to offer amendments, he would withdraw his motion. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said if the bill is not going to be found constitutional, there is no point in discussing the educational issues. He recommended that the HES Committee refer it to the Judiciary Committee to see if it is constitutional. If it is, then they would refer it back to the HES Committee to deal with the educational issues. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE wanted to be sure that the bill would be brought back to the HES Committee before it proceeds to the Finance Committee. REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER agreed with that. Number 0632 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked whether it is necessary to refer it to another committee when there are two legal opinions, one from the legislative branch and one from the executive branch, which state the proposed piece of legislation is unconstitutional. It seems to him that the HES Committee has the ability to assess whether those opinions are significant obstacles to moving the bill forward. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN further stated he feels the process of moving a bill out of this committee before the issues have been dealt with is not a good precedent to establish at the beginning of the 21st Legislature. He thinks the committee should shoulder their responsibility to address the issues, do the work that needs to be done and not rely upon other legislators and committees to pick up the load. He said he felt this piece of legislation seemed to be the legitimate work of the HES committee. Before it moves out, they should be satisfied that it addresses the issues of constitutionality and accountability. He cautioned the committee against moving this forward until it has been worked to a comfortable level. Number 0793 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said legality is an issue of the Judiciary Committee, not of the HES Committee. He said it didn't make sense to try to fix the educational issues and then find out the legislation is not constitutional. REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER asked if they would be assured of getting SSHB 5 back from the Judiciary Committee to deal with it from a HES perspective. Number 0879 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said that precedent has already been established in the Senate where bills actually will return to committees with request. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said the process for receiving a formal referral on the floor of the House is that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee would request the legislation be sent to his committee and the speaker would add another referral on the floor. He added that by taking this to the House floor to get a judiciary referral, instead of the HES Committee just referring it to the Judiciary Committee, that would add some confidence to the people who would wonder if there is something spurious here. Number 1047 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN moved that the HES committee hold SSHB 5 until such time as the chair of the Judiciary Committee has an opportunity to approach the speaker requesting an additional referral to the Judiciary Committee. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON objected to the motion. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE added an amendment that after the Judiciary Committee looks at it, they will refer it back to the HES Committee. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN agreed with the amendment. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON said he is going to vote against this motion. If it fails, he will support a motion to vote it out of committee to the Judiciary Committee; if they pass it, it will come back to the HES Committee. It will accomplish the same result but it would be the result of this committee's action and not the result of the Judiciary Committee chairman's request. Number 1220 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN restated that he moves that the HES Committee defer action on SSHB 5 until there is an opportunity for it to be referred by the speaker of the House to the Judiciary Committee with a follow up referral, if it passes the Judiciary Committee, it will come back to the HES Committee. A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Green, Morgan, Kemplen and Brice voted in favor of the motion. Representatives Whitaker, Dyson and Coghill voted against it. The motion passed, therefore SSHB 5 will be referred to the Judiciary Committee through the House floor with a follow up referral back to the HES Committee.