SENATOR TAYLOR introduced HCR 24 (SUPPORT SUIT AGAINST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT) and invited MEL KROGSENG, Staff Assistant to the sponsor, REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES to review the bill. SENATOR TAYLOR noted the bill before the committee was CS FOR HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 24(JUD) am. MS. KROGSENG explained HCR 24 supports the governor's decision to authorize a suit against the United States government for violating the Alaska Statehood Act and the Alaska Statehood Compact. She read the Sponsor Statement: "When the Alaska Statehood Act was crafted, Congress guaranteed all attributes of sovereignty that were granted to all other states under the Constitution to Alaska. However, over the past few years, the terms of the Alaska Statehood Act have been violated by the Congress. These violations include withdrawal from development nearly 80% of federal land from which Alaska was to derive mineral royalties. Alaska is also the only state not allowed to sell her oil resources abroad. We are a sovereign state and we must not let our sovereignty be violated. The Statehood Act was an agreement between Congress and the People of Alaska and it cannot unilaterally be changed. We must stand up for our rights now and in the future." MS. KROGSENG indicated the pamphlet provided by the governor's office entitled DEFENDING ALASKA'S STATEHOOD COMPACT goes into greater detail with some of the violations of the Act. She deferred the remainder of the testimony to CHERI JACOBUS, Chief, Attorney General for the Department of Law who is handling the case for the State of Alaska. Number 049 SENATOR DONLEY asked why PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH did an Executive Order allowing the export of 250 thousand barrels a day of California crude, but did not do a similar act for the State of Alaska. MS. JACOBUS thought the only answer could come from PRESIDENT BUSH, but she thought SENATOR DONLEY had hit upon an important factor, that Alaska has been singled out for unique treatment. She claimed no other state, or court, has had a case such as the oil export ban, where one state has so clearly been discriminated against. She had no knowledge of PRESIDENT BUSH'S reason. SENATOR DONLEY asked MS. JACOBUS if she had consulted with MR. JOHN KATZ, Special Counsel for State/Federal Relations, as to the timing of the filing of the lawsuit, in relation to the potential of PRESIDENT BUSH considering an Executive Order during the period of time before the export act was reauthorized by Congress. MS. JACOBUS explained the decision to file the lawsuit, and the timing, was actually made by the governor's office in consultation with ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE. She said it was not filed without the concurrence and the support of the governor's office in discussion with MR. KATZ. SENATOR DONLEY asked MS. JACOBUS if MR. KATZ had given any information on PRESIDENT BUSH'S position on potential executive orders during the gap when the export act was in place. MS. JACOBUS said MR. KATZ had not given her any specific information as to exactly what he was hearing from PRESIDENT BUSH, bus she indicated discussions with the governor's office as well as ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE. SENATOR DONLEY asked if she had ever inquired of people in the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice, or the BUSH Whitehouse why they didn't do an executive order such as was done in California for Alaska. Number 100 MS. JACOBUS explained there had been many conversations with the Department of Energy, and she said the department was currently doing a study on the impact of the oil export ban of areas such as California and Washington State. She claimed the Department of Energy has long been in support of allowing Alaska to export its oil. MS. JACOBUS said she has not had conversations with the Department of Justice other than with respect to the case itself, but she assured SENATOR DONLEY everyone was negotiating with the BUSH Administration, and has continued with the current administration. SENATOR DONLEY didn't think he had received an answer to his question, so he reiterated his question as to whether MS. JACOBUS ever asked anyone in the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice, or the BUSH Administration why they did it for California but didn't do it for Alaska. She said she did not ask. SENATOR DONLEY said this was a very important question. He explained, while he supports the lawsuit, he didn't support the timing of the lawsuit. In a dialogue among the committee members and MS. JACOBUS, they discussed statute of limitations as to what kind, the litigation of the statutes, and the relevance of when the statute of limitations were filed. She concluded by explaining she was not a party to the negotiations between the governor's office and the Congressional Delegation. Number 150 SENATOR DONLEY thought it was a mistake to not have her involved fully with those doing the legal process. MS. JACOBUS clarified the timing of the lawsuit was arranged by the Congressional Delegation and MR. KATZ, and she understood the negotiations were ongoing. SENATOR DONLEY was not satisfied with the reasoning as presented by MS. JACOBUS, and she maintained she did not know why the Bush Administration made their decision when it was made. MS. JACOBUS said she did not understand the significance of the questions by SENATOR DONLEY on the timing of the lawsuit. SENATOR DONLEY said there needed to be testimony by MR. KATZ, but MS. JACOBUS didn't see how this would be related to the support of the two lawsuits. SENATOR DONLEY said his concern had to do with the timing of the lawsuits, not with the content of the lawsuits. SENATOR DONLEY said he would appreciate the opportunity to talk to MR. KATZ, because he thought all routes in the discussion led to him. SENATOR DONLEY indicated he had some serious doubts about the timing of one of the lawsuits, that the State would have gotten an Executive Order out of PRESIDENT BUSH if we hadn't sued him on the subject. Number 205 In answer to a question from SENATOR TAYLOR, SENATOR DONLEY explained there was a recommendation from the Department of Energy to lift the ban, but the Department of Justice said "no," because there was on going litigation. MS. JACOBUS objected to this line of judgment and said she did not understand the thrust of his question about whether the lawsuit was brought before the decision had been made by the Whitehouse. She reviewed her discussion with the governor's office and JOHN KATZ that the decision had already been made to not lift the ban, which was the impetus for the lawsuit. She continued to confront some of the arguments about the lawsuits with her understanding and apologized for her misunderstanding of the earlier questions. SENATOR DONLEY said he still wanted to talk to MR. KATZ about the timing of the lawsuit, and he thought it was an important question to the Judiciary Committee, since questions will be asked. SENATOR TAYLOR was not sure of the extent MR. KATZ would be willing to reply or disclose confidential discussions with his "boss." He said he would contact MR. KATZ for the information and announced the bill would be held over until next week. SENATOR DONLEY reiterated his support for the substance of the lawsuits, and he only wanted to know about the timing of the specific suit. SENATOR TAYLOR directed his aide to find out when MR. KATZ was available for teleconference.