HB 83-FEDERAL LAWS & EXECUTIVE ORDERS  1:50:19 PM CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of HB 83. [CSHB 83(JUD) was before the committee.] 1:50:39 PM JIM POUND, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, sponsor of HB 83, introduced the bill on behalf of the sponsor. He spoke to the following sponsor statement: [Original punctuation provided.] CS for HB 83 clarifies in Alaska Statute that a federal statute, regulation, presidential executive orders, or secretarial orders or actions that are not properly adopted or are unconstitutional do not preempt state law. The Attorney General will continue to review and report federal statute, regulation, presidential executive orders, or secretarial orders or actions that appear to have not been properly adopted. Under CSHB 83 those reports will be forwarded to the legislature for consideration. CSHB 83 presumes Alaska Legislative interest in an important legal process known as nullification. It opens the opportunity for the state to consider proclaiming a federal law or rule to be void and inoperative, or 'non-effective' within the boundaries of that state. In CSHB 83 a negative review by the Attorney General would generate an alert to our Judiciary Committees so nullification legislation can be considered. There has been disagreement regarding nullification going back to the late eighteenth century. Not surprisingly, federal courts have often leaned toward favoring federal power over state sovereignty in spite of the fact that our founding fathers clearly intended otherwise. Federalism is our historically unique and profound arrangement where sovereign and separate states got together and carefully designed a central government with limited powers. It is an illogical perversion of one of our most important founding principles to presume states must comply with unconstitutional federal language. CSHB 83 presumes a proper State responsibility to uphold and protect our constitution. CSHB 83 is intended to provide important information to the Alaska State Legislature by tapping the expertise and evaluation of our Attorney General. Certainly the legislature has a responsibility to consider its response whenever there is question of constitutionality of a federal statute, or the process involved in regulation, presidential executive order, or secretarial order or actions. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI summarized that the attorney general will review federal statutes, regulations, executive orders and actions and secretarial orders to make sure that they don't conflict with state law. MR. POUND clarified that there is already a review process, but bringing the findings up under state law will be up to the determination of the judiciary committees. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there would be a timeline imposed on the attorney general to review all of these documents because it could be tens if not hundreds of thousands of pages. MR. POUND said he couldn't speak to how the attorney general does it now, but he did know that DOL provides information to the governor's office. The bill ensures that the legislature is included in the loop. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI highlighted that the bill doesn't ask the attorney general to do anything new, just notify legislative bodies if there are conflicts. MR. POUND agreed. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there are specific [federal] statutes, regulations, or executive orders that he believes are currently being violated. 1:54:39 PM MR. POUND said he finds a recent interpretation from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs interesting. He characterized a letter sent to veterans about competency as excessive oversight based on a regulation promulgated by the VA. He read the following excerpt: A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these provisions you may be fined, imprisoned, or both under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the attorney general was filing a lawsuit to overturn that for being unconstitutional. MR. POUND said he was not aware of that. 1:55:53 PM SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he would hope that the attorney general would take legal action if an unconstitutional law is on the books prohibiting veterans from getting firearms. MR. POUND surmised that would happen at some point. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the sponsor asked for an increment in the budget to fund this litigation. MR. POUND responded that the Department of Law submitted a zero fiscal note, and it probably would be some time before the issue of litigation costs come up. CHAIR COGHILL asked if the sponsor anticipated that the reports called for in the bill would flow with other annual reports coming out of the Department of Law (DOL). MR. POUND said yes, and any issue that's identified and results in legislation would still have to go through the legislative process. 1:57:31 PM CHAIR COGHILL said he'd like to hear from the DOL to understand what is already taking place and how this bill will be accommodated. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he likes the idea of DOL keeping the legislature informed, but he'd also like an annual report about litigation and the costs. CHAIR COGHILL asked Mr. Pound to make arrangements with the Department of Law to come before the committee to answer questions. MR. POUND acknowledged the request. 2:00:33 PM SENATOR DYSON commended the effort and motive of the legislation, and expressed hope that somebody was watching for federal actions that affect how the legislature does its business and fulfills its mission. CHAIR COGHILL commented on the balance between working cooperatively with the federal government and challenging federal action. He stated that he would hold HB 83 in committee.