SJR 18-FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION  9:48:40 AM CHAIR DYSON announced the consideration of SJR 18. 9:49:39 AM TYLER BELK, Staff, Senator Dyson, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, stated that Michael Farris will testify before the committee. He noted that Mr. Farris is the Project Head for the Convention of States (COS) Project. 9:50:22 AM MICHAEL FARRIS, Project Head, Convention of States (COS) Project, Austin, Texas, explained his background as follows: I am a constitutional attorney. I have argued in the U.S. Supreme Court and the appellate courts of 13 states, including an Article V case that I litigated back in late 1970s that spilled over into the early 1980s concerning Equal Rights Amendment and the extension of time that Congress gave to that amendment. MR. FARRIS explained his COS involvement as follows: I began being involved in this project because I am convinced that Washington, D.C. is broken and will never restrain its own power, the debt is the "tip of the iceberg." Federal spending, federal regulation, the federal mandates that come against the states I believe violate the principals of self-government where the state legislators are ordered to the bidding of Congress other than the bidding of their constituents when federal money is dangled out in front of you in a coercive fashion. Presidents of all parties are legislating through executive orders and through regulatory actions that are not passed in the appropriate fashion under the Constitution. I think that the low ranking of the opinion polls of Congress being in single digits these days is a general assessment of the American public that Washington, D.C. is broken and something needs to be done. The Founders gave us that something in Article V. George Mason insisted that there would be a day where the federal government would overstep its bounds and when that happened, there needed to be a way for the states to unilaterally purpose amendments that the states would then ratify to curtail the power of the federal government and that is what this resolution does. There are other Article V ideas out there that are good ideas, I don't think they go far enough. The balance budget amendment is a good idea, but that controls simply the debt-mechanism, it does not control spending, it does not control many of the other things that I have just addressed. If we think that freedom is going to survive without stopping the structural problems in Washington D.C., I think we are guessing and hoping for our future in a way that is not justified. I think we really need to ensure that we preserve the freedom of this country by taking decisive action for the states to effectively take away the misuse of power for the federal government and return it to the people and to the states. 9:53:17 AM MR. FARRIS addressed arguments against the COS as follows: Most of the arguments that I have seen raised against COS concern the possibility that there would be a convention that would disobey the call and go on to consider other matters. There are so many check and balances into the system that make that, frankly, impossible if we have any kind of semblance of political reality in our assessments; because, at the end of the day, 38 state legislatures have to ratify anything that comes out of a convention. There are three steps of the process, 34 states by simple majority in both houses of the states have to file an application on the same topic. Then at the convention itself, it is one-state-one-vote. The legislators appoint the delegates to the convention and 26 states would have to approve the precise language on any of the topics that are germane under the applications that the states have written. Then the language of the proposed amendments that come out, if 6 amendments come out, just like the Bill of Rights were sent out as a package of 12 and only 10 were ratified by 1791, the states could pick 1-6 of the amendments to ratify, but 38 state legislatures, by a simple majority vote in both houses, would then have to ratify any of the amendments that come forward. So, a lot of checks and balances, a lot of safety in here, but we've got to get started. Georgia was the first state to approve this resolution, last week we've had the Alabama House approve it, and we are moving in a handful of other states, we expect a good number of states next legislative session. My guess is that four or five states, and hopefully one of those will be Alaska, will approve it in this legislative session. We are hoping that that this will be done in two or three legislative terms. ` 9:55:20 AM CHAIR DYSON noted that Mr. Farris mentioned that some number of states have to make application. He asked if SJR 18 is an application. MR. FARRIS answered yes. He stated that SJR 18 is the correct legislative-vehicle to make the application. CHAIR DYSON recalled that over 20 years ago, Alaska's legislature did pass something calling for an Article V Convention. He asked what the time limit was for the state's applications. MR. FARRIS answered that there is not a time limit. He noted that one of the Bill of Rights proposed in 1789 was actually ratified in the 1990s. He pointed out that an application is good in perpetuity unless a legislature puts a time limit or rescinds their application. He explained that there have been over 400 applications in the history of the republic from 49 states. There has never been a COS because there have never been two thirds of the states agreeing on a subject matter. He asserted that either COS will be done in the next few years or it is not going to happen. 9:57:07 AM SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that he could live with SJR 18 if limitations were not set on the resolution and a broad COS was called. He remarked that he did not believe 38 states are going to agree. He asserted that COS should not be limited. He asked that a resolution be passed that said "Requesting the United States Congress to call a Convention of States for the purposes of making changes to the Constitution." He asserted that a broader resolution would get more states onboard. MR. FARRIS replied that Senator Wielechowski's suggestion is theoretically possible, but 34 states would have to purpose a general amending convention. He explained that there are three ways COS can be purposed as follows: 1. General Convention. 2. Topical Convention: the same as what the Convention of States Project is proposing. 3. Amendment Convention: focuses on a particular amendment like a balanced budget. He asserted that there is not the political will to get to 4 states, let alone 38 states for a general convention. He said there is a lot of angst in the country about changing the Bill of Rights and provisions. He set forth that there should be one convention on a limited topic so that everyone can see that the procedures are safe and confidence is built in the process. He stated that the chances of anybody doing a wide open COS are essentially zero. 10:00:53 AM SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI remarked that the reason the COS Project is running into problems was due to the need for a three quarter vote. He set forth that a broader call forces compromises. He said he would like to see a provision overturning Citizens United due to campaign contributions being out of control and special interest groups being out of control. He noted that he will propose amendments on the Senate Floor that are against Citizens United and for equal rights for women. He suggested that narrowing COS makes it more difficult for states to agree. MR. FARRIS answered that he understands Senator Wielechowski's point of view, but noted that if Alaska does something that is idiosyncratic in character by writing up its own things, then Alaska has a moral obligation to go out and organize a process to build the same kind of momentum in 34 states. He pointed out that the current process for COS requires two thirds and not three fourths. He specified that three fourths is required for ratification. He said the amendments Senator Wielechowski suggested would be viewed as effectively a way to kill the process because there is no constituency to build the approach and no one is out organizing for the approach. He set forth that Alaska would effectively pass a resolution that has no force and effect, the end result will do no one any good if amendments are added. He explained that the intent is to do something good by trying to stop the abuse of power in Washington, D.C. He conceded that maybe everything cannot be solved in the initial time around for COS, but some things can be solved. He said something has to be done about debt, spending, and regulation. CHAIR DYSON noted that one of the big pushbacks will often be seen is on the concept of a "Runaway COS." 10:03:58 AM JENNIE GRIMWOOD, President, Eagle Forum-Alaska, Cordova, Alaska, stated that Eagle Forum opposes SJR 18. She noted that SJR 18's objectives are on balanced budgets and term limits. She pointed out that other groups are proposing amendments and the Eagle Forum questioned whether the Constitution should be opened for uncertain change for COS. She pointed out that the possibility for bigger states to control COS. She summarized that any restrictions set on the delegates in advance may violate Article V and claims that COS can be controlled are misleading. 10:06:55 AM SENATOR COGHILL noted his support for SJR 18 due to the need to challenge the federal government. He asked if the imposed checks and balances on COS are sufficient to keep the convention from throwing off the Constitution. MR. GRIMWOOD answered that no one knows because a COS has not been done since the 1700s. SENATOR COGHILL stated that he is less fearful, but noted his respect for the Eagle Forum. He set forth that the lengthy COS process has a steep hill to climb and some pretty good checks are in place. He asked the Eagle Forum to reconsider the checks that have been put into place. 10:09:13 AM DAVID EICHLER, representing himself, North Pole, Alaska, stated that he did not agree with the Eagle Forum's position and was available for questions. 10:10:17 AM CHARLES KACPROWICZ, National Director, Citizen Initiatives, Pine, North Carolina, stated that his organization is an advocate for Article V, single issue amendment conventions. He noted that Citizen Initiatives is working on balanced budget, sovereignty and state rights, and the countermand amendments. He noted that he has been involved in the battle for Article V amendments for 41 years. He addressed the balanced budget amendment and noted that 23 states continue to have active applications. He claimed that the climb for a balanced budget amendment continues to be uphill due to misinformation. He set forth that state delegates sent to COS will act as ambassadors and not free agents with license to do anything they want. He explained that Citizen Initiatives is opposed to the COS Project call for COS because it is too broad with two or three broad sweeping topics. He set forth that Article V is not a Constitutional Convention and its purpose is restrictive for the purpose of proposing amendments. He asserted that state legislatures, under Article V, are sovereign bodies and are in charge as the forth rank of government. He asserted that the state legislatures are the key to seeing the nation turn around. 10:22:18 AM MIKE COONS, Director-Alaska, Citizen Initiatives, Palmer, AK, said he supports the proper use of Article V in the U.S. Constitution. He set forth that SJR 18 is on track, but has many issues. He posed questions should SJR 18 pass as follows: 1. Who is going to write the amendments that come from the subject topics? 2. Will those amendments be written by the Legislature prior to COS? 3. Who is the deliberative body, the Legislature or delegates? 4. Will there be written instructions that make a convention a republican convention with one- state-one-vote? 5. Will the delegates be bound to the Legislature? He noted that previous calls in the nation's history have been single issue amendments. He asserted that issues must be resolved prior to passing SJR 18. He said Citizen Initiatives has calls for specific, single issue amendments that the Legislature would pre-approve with a delegate resolution that would ensure one-state-one-vote, making COS safe, predictable, and ultimately providing for an excellent chance of ratification. 10:25:39 AM CHAIR DYSON announced that public hearing is closed. SENATOR GIESSEL moved to report from committee SJR 18, labeled 28-LS1284\N with zero fiscal note and individual recommendations. CHAIR DYSON asked if there was objection. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that he was not going to object, but noted that he may run some amendments on the Senate Floor. CHAIR DYSON explained that SJR 18 was the exact parallel with the resolution that was going through the House. He stated that his intention was to only begin the process and add Alaska to the queue of the states that were calling for COS. He set forth that the information that he has seen is that there is a significant process where the subject of the call will get narrowed down to something of which there will be 34 states with a careful delineation of what is the scope of COS with limits on selection, responsibilities, and remedies for delegates. 10:27:39 AM CHAIR DYSON announced that seeing no objection, SJR 18 is passed from the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee.