SJR 19-CALL FED. CONSTITUTIONAL CONV: TERM LIMITS  1:52:31 PM CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of SJR 19. 1:53:14 PM FORREST WOLFE, Staff, Senator Lesil McGuire, introduced SJR 19 speaking to the following sponsor statement: SJR 19 begins a process under Article V of the U.S. Constitution for application to Congress to call a Convention of States to debate an amendment for term limits for members of Congress. As of February 2016, nearly 80% of Americans and 78% of Alaskans have expressed bi-partisan support to limiting the number of terms a person can serve in the U.S. Congress. SJR 19 is about respecting the will of the people and fixing a broken system. In 1994 and 1996 the people of Alaska voted to express their strong support in imposing term limits. The 1994 voter initiative passed with nearly 63% of the Alaska electorate, or 126,960 Alaskans, expressing the desire to limit terms of congressional office holders. Twenty-two other states also voted to limit congressional terms. The next year, in [USTL vs. Thornton] the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional for states to pass individual state laws placing limits on the number of terms a congressman could serve. The Court instead ruled that a constitutional amendment would be necessary. Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides a means, other than directly through Congress, for the states to propose adopting such an amendment. Implementing term limits empowers the people by allowing for people with new ideas and energy to compete for office. Washington D.C. is broken and bound by endless gridlock literally unable to respond to the voters' wishes. One only needs to look at the skyrocketing debt -- some $19 trillion - and inefficient programs, to know that Congress is unable to control spending and fix the country's problems. Contrary to the Framer's intent to have a citizen legislature that rotates regularly many of those in Washington have grown apart from the very constituents that sent them there. SJR 19 will help end "business as usual" in Washington D.C. and helps to put the people back in charge of their government. Incumbents are heavily favored in elections creating an uneven playing field for those with fresh ideas to represent and serve. 1:54:52 PM NICOLAS TOMBOULIDES, U.S. Term Limits (USTL), Washington, DC, provided supporting information for SJR 19. He related that this national non-profit organization was the appellant in the U.S. Supreme Court case USTL vs. Thornton. USTL assisted 23 states to place term limits on prospective members of the U.S. Congress but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not impose qualifications that are stricter than those outlined in the Constitution. The silver lining is that this can be done under Article V, he said. He explained that Article V describes the process whereby the Constitution may be amended. Thirty four states must pass resolutions on a single subject calling for a convention. Once that threshold is met, Congress is required to call a convention. Each state appoints its delegates who would propose an amendment to impose congressional term limits. This would be ratified by the legislatures or conventions within 38 states. MR. TOMBOULIDES reiterated support for the resolution opining that Congress is practically and geographically removed from the citizens of the U.S. He quoted a professor at U.C. Irvine to support that position. He described the system as broken with large, gerrymandered districts that encourage special interests to step in and keep members in office for decades at a time. He stressed the importance of creating an election system that allows for fresh ideas and rebalances the system to make Congress more accountable to the people. MR. TOMBOULIDES concluded that the founders intended for Article V to be used and there is no better time than now. 2:00:29 PM SENATOR COSTELLO asked, assuming there is a convention and term limits imposed, how this would affect the balance of power between the three branches of government. MR. TOMBOULIDES said he believes this would reinvigorate Congress and enable the will of the people to place a check on the executive branch because citizens would feel their voices are being heard in congressional elections. SENATOR COSTELLO asked the average number of years that executive branch bureaucrats have served in their current positions. MR. TOMBOULIDES offered to follow up with the information. SENATOR COGHILL asked who led on the opposite side of the issue that resulted in USTL vs. Thornton. 2:02:55 PM MR. TOMBOULIDES recalled that Arkansas Congressman Ray Thornton challenged the state constitutional amendment. A lower court ruled in his favor and USTL appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. It was a 5-4 decision USTL with Justice Thomas writing the dissenting opinion. SENATOR COGHILL commented that some might look at this as trying to cut Alaska's senior Congressman off at the knees and his perspective is that couldn't be farther from the truth. He asked, assuming there is a convention and term limits imposed, if this would be prospective. MR. TOMBOULIDES said the delegates would make that decision, but his organization tends to favor a prospective term limit. Current members shouldn't be exempted forever, but they shouldn't be thrown out of office immediately either, he said. SENATOR COGHILL reiterated that he isn't interested in removing the Alaska delegation then added that the effort may have worth if two-thirds of the states agree. He asked if continuous applications under Article V mount or dissipate rapidly based on political whim. MR. TOMBOULIDES said regional issues tend to die out, but when a national issue garners enough support Congress tends to act before the convention is convened. He named several amendments in the Constitution that weren't done by an Article V convention, but were pressured by one. SENATOR COGHILL commented that there is a rich history of America putting Congress under pressure. 2:09:03 PM SENATOR MCGUIRE asked how the court distinguished its reasoning in the Thornton decision and the ruling in 1951 that allowed the term limits of the presidency to be redefined. MR. TOMBOULIDES explained that in 1951 Congress ratified the 22nd Amendment imposing a two-term limit on the office of President, whereas in 1995 it was a U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding state statutes and state constitutional amendments. The latter did not have the same force of law as the 22nd Amendment, he said. SENATOR COSTELLO asked, if term limits had been imposed on representatives and senators, how many presidents would not have gone from consecutive service in Congress and then on to the presidency. She commented on the advantages of institutional knowledge versus fresh ideas and asked if he'd thought about weighing the opportunity cost when he discussed term limits. MR. TOMBOULIDES said he'd follow up with the data, but their research indicates that newer members are more skeptical of the weight and power of bureaucracy. That being said, preserving institutional knowledge is very important and the delegates will have to work to strike the right balance, he said. 2:14:51 PM SENATOR MCGUIRE commented on the disconnect millennials feel with their government and opined that it's good to move elected officials through. SENATOR COGHILL commented that this would force the question on the voters and his interest stems from the low voter turnout. 2:20:00 PM CHAIR MCGUIRE opened public testimony. 2:20:43 PM MIKE COONS, National Legislative Director, Citizen Initiatives, Palmer, Alaska, raised concern with some of the language in the first resolve on page 2 of SJR 19. He pointed out that there are already several single issue Article V organizations that are looking for a single amendment. Also, the Convention of States came up with three broad subjects, one of which is term limits. The COS concept on term limits is it would apply to Congress, federal judges, and the Supreme Court, which means an amendment for each office. He suggested everyone get together and put forward applications that are specific to a named amendment. In this case, a term limit for Congress amendment so that is the only thing that could be brought up. He also encouraged introducing a delegate resolution that defines the convention and contains the specific language of the amendment. He suggested looking at the language in SJR 15 and changing the language in the first resolve to something similar. He also expressed concern with the second resolve because it combines with the convention of the states version of term limits that has passed in 5 states. His belief is that Congress will deny that. 2:28:05 PM CHAIR MCGUIRE held SJR 19 in committee.