ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 6, 2009                                                                                          
                           8:04 a.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Jay Ramras, Chair                                                                                                
Representative John Coghill                                                                                                     
Representative Carl Gatto                                                                                                       
Representative Bob Lynn                                                                                                         
Representative Max Gruenberg                                                                                                    
Representative Lindsey Holmes                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Vice Chair                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 193                                                                                                              
"An   Act  relating   to  representation   by  a   legislator  or                                                               
legislative  employee  of  another person  in  an  administrative                                                               
hearing; relating to charity events  under the Legislative Ethics                                                               
Act;  requiring  compensation of  public  members  of the  Select                                                               
Committee  on Legislative  Ethics; exempting  certain information                                                               
from  disclosure  requirements  of the  Legislative  Ethics  Act;                                                               
relating  to   the  selection  of   alternate  members   and  the                                                               
participation  of   members  and  alternate  members   in  formal                                                               
proceedings  of the  Select Committee  on Legislative  Ethics and                                                               
its  subcommittees;  and   defining  'constituent,'  'constituent                                                               
service,'  'legislative purpose,'  'nonlegislative purpose,'  and                                                               
'private  benefit' for  the purposes  of  the Legislative  Ethics                                                               
Act."                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD BUT NOT SCHEDULED; CSHB 193(JUD) WAS REPORTED FROM                                                                 
       COMMITTEE ON 4/3/09                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 186                                                                                                              
"An  Act  declaring that  certain  firearms  and accessories  are                                                               
exempt from federal regulation."                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 186(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 36                                                                                        
"An Act  relating to ballot initiative  proposal applications and                                                               
to ballot initiatives."                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 193                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: LEGISLATIVE ETHICS ACT                                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) COGHILL                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
03/18/09       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/18/09       (H)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
03/24/09       (H)       STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/24/09       (H)       Heard & Held; Assigned to Subcommittee                                                                 
03/24/09       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/26/09       (H)       STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/26/09       (H)       Moved CSHB 193(STA) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/26/09       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/27/09       (H)       STA RPT CS(STA) NT 4DP 1AM                                                                             
03/27/09       (H)       DP: JOHNSON, SEATON, WILSON, LYNN                                                                      
03/27/09       (H)       AM: GRUENBERG                                                                                          
03/28/09       (H)       STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                            
03/28/09       (H)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
03/30/09       (H)       FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD                                                                           
04/03/09       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/03/09       (H)       Moved CSHB 193(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/03/09       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/06/09       (H)       JUD AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 186                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: AK FIREARMS EXEMPT FROM FED. REGULATION                                                                            
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
03/12/09       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/12/09       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
04/06/09       (H)       JUD AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 36                                                                                                                   
SHORT TITLE: INITIATIVES:  CONTRIBUTIONS/PROCEDURES                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JOHANSEN, MILLETT, WILSON                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
01/20/09       (H)       PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09                                                                                
01/20/09       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
01/20/09       (H)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
03/25/09       (H)       SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED                                                                          
03/25/09       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/25/09       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
04/06/09       (H)       JUD AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE KELLY                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 186.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
DERECK MILLER, Staff                                                                                                            
Representative Mike Kelly                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Assisted with the presentation of HB 186 on                                                              
behalf of the sponsor, Representative Kelly.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SCOTT HAMANN                                                                                                                    
Kenai, Alaska                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 186.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
STEVE CATALANO                                                                                                                  
Kenai, Alaska                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of                                                                   
HB 186.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KYLE JOHANSEN                                                                                                    
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented SSHB 36 as one of the joint prime                                                              
sponsors.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
SONIA CHRISTENSEN, Staff                                                                                                        
Representative Kyle Johansen                                                                                                    
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Assisted with the presentation of SSHB 36                                                                
on behalf of one if its joint prime sponsors, Representative                                                                    
Johansen.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                      
Legal Services Section                                                                                                          
Criminal Division                                                                                                               
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments and responded to                                                                       
questions during discussion of HB 186.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE KELLY                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 186.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
SONIA CHRISTENSEN, Staff                                                                                                        
Representative Kyle Johansen                                                                                                    
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Assisted with  the presentation of  SSHB 36                                                             
on  behalf of  one if  its joint  prime sponsors,  Representative                                                               
Johansen.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHIP THOMA                                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  discussion  of  SSHB 36,  provided                                                             
comments and expressed concern with Section 13.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
WAYNE STEVENS, President/CEO                                                                                                    
Alaska State Chamber of Commerce (ASCC)                                                                                         
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Urged passage of SSHB 36.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MARK GNADT                                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Provided comments  during  discussion  of                                                             
SSHB 36.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
8:04:56 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR JAY  RAMRAS called the  House Judiciary  Standing Committee                                                             
meeting to  order at  8:04 a.m.   Representatives  Ramras, Gatto,                                                               
Lynn,   and  Holmes   were  present   at  the   call  to   order.                                                               
Representatives Coghill and Gruenberg  arrived as the meeting was                                                               
in progress.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HB 193 - LEGISLATIVE ETHICS ACT                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
8:05:19 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the  first order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  193, "An  Act  relating to  representation by  a                                                               
legislator  or  legislative  employee  of another  person  in  an                                                               
administrative  hearing; relating  to  charity  events under  the                                                               
Legislative Ethics Act; requiring  compensation of public members                                                               
of the Select Committee on  Legislative Ethics; exempting certain                                                               
information  from  disclosure  requirements  of  the  Legislative                                                               
Ethics Act;  relating to the  selection of alternate  members and                                                               
the  participation of  members and  alternate  members in  formal                                                               
proceedings  of the  Select Committee  on Legislative  Ethics and                                                               
its  subcommittees;  and   defining  'constituent,'  'constituent                                                               
service,'  'legislative purpose,'  'nonlegislative purpose,'  and                                                               
'private  benefit' for  the purposes  of  the Legislative  Ethics                                                               
Act."    [CSHB  193(JUD)  had been  reported  from  committee  on                                                               
4/3/09.]                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS indicated  that once  Representative Gruenberg  was                                                               
present, he  would be [providing  the committee  with alternative                                                               
language  to  Conceptual  Amendment  4,  as  amended,  which  was                                                               
adopted on 4/3/09].                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  then relayed that HB  193 would be set  aside until                                                               
later in the meeting.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 186 - AK FIREARMS EXEMPT FROM FED. REGULATION                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
8:06:00 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced  that the next order of  business would be                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO.  186, "An Act declaring that  certain firearms and                                                               
accessories are exempt from federal regulation."                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
8:06:30 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  moved  to   adopt  the  proposed  committee                                                               
substitute  (CS)  for  HB 186,  Version  26-LS0627\E,  Luckhaupt,                                                               
4/3/09,  as the  working  document.   There  being no  objection,                                                               
Version E was before the committee.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
8:07:30 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MIKE KELLY,  Alaska  State Legislature,  sponsor,                                                               
relayed that HB  186 was engendered by a concern  that the rights                                                               
granted  by  the  Second Amendment  be  preserved  and  defended.                                                               
Specifically,   HB  186   provides   that   firearms  and   their                                                               
accessories manufactured  in and kept  in Alaska are  not subject                                                               
to  federal  law  or  federal  regulation.    In  response  to  a                                                               
question, he  suggested that firearm and  accessory manufacturing                                                               
in Alaska  might become a  growing industry should HB  186 become                                                               
law.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
8:10:13 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DERECK  MILLER, Staff,  Representative Mike  Kelly, Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,   on  behalf   of  Representative   Kelly,  sponsor,                                                               
explained that Section 1 of  Version E outlines findings that the                                                               
authority for  the bill comes  from the Second, Ninth,  and Tenth                                                               
Amendments  of the  U.S. Constitution.   Section  2 of  Version E                                                               
adds  a  new  proposed  AS  44.99.500(a)-(d)  that  exempts  from                                                               
federal  law and  federal regulation  - including  registration -                                                               
personal firearms,  firearm accessories,  and ammunition  that is                                                               
manufactured  in  Alaska and  remains  in  Alaska.   Furthermore,                                                               
since  such firearms,  accessories,  and  ammunition wouldn't  be                                                               
leaving the state,  the Commerce Clause of  the U.S. Constitution                                                               
would  not  apply  either.     Under  proposed  AS  44.99.500(c),                                                               
firearms manufactured  in Alaska  shall have  the words  "Made in                                                               
Alaska" clearly stamped  on a central metallic part,  such as the                                                               
receiver   or  frame.      Proposed   AS  44.99.500(d)   contains                                                               
definitions  of  the  terms, "firearm  accessory",  "generic  and                                                               
insignificant  parts", and  "manufactured".   Section  3 adds  an                                                               
applicability  section   to  uncodified   law  stating   that  AS                                                               
44.99.500  would  apply  to firearms,  firearm  accessories,  and                                                               
ammunition manufactured in Alaska after October 1, 2009.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MILLER  mentioned  that  the  Montana  legislature  recently                                                               
passed a similar law, and  that the Tennessee legislature is also                                                               
considering such  a law.  He  noted that due to  a separation-of-                                                               
powers  issue, Version  E no  longer contains  language requiring                                                               
the attorney general  to defend citizens being  prosecuted by the                                                               
federal government;  that provision had caused  the Department of                                                               
Law (DOL) concern.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES noted  that no state has  had this language                                                               
on  the  books  long  enough  for  any  potential  constitutional                                                               
problems  to be  made  known.   She said  she  is concerned  that                                                               
passage  of  the bill  could  be  setting  some citizens  up  for                                                               
problems  with  the  federal  government -  opening  them  up  to                                                               
significant civil and criminal liabilities.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY  expressed a preference for  reinserting the                                                               
aforementioned  DOL mandate  back into  the bill,  surmising that                                                               
such language would address Representative  Holmes's concern.  He                                                               
acknowledged,  though, that  removal of  that language  addressed                                                               
the  aforementioned separation-of-powers  concern.   He predicted                                                               
that  anyone   considering  starting  a   business  manufacturing                                                               
firearms,    firearm    accessories,   or    ammunition,    would                                                               
automatically  consult with  an  attorney to  ensure that  he/she                                                               
doesn't run into problems with the federal government.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  mentioned that he's  received word that  the fiscal                                                               
note from the DOL for Version  E would still be indeterminate due                                                               
to the bill's potential of engendering litigation.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  questioned  whether passage  of  the  bill                                                               
could be  interpreted to mean  that Alaska acknowledges  that the                                                               
Second Amendment could be overturned.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY offered his belief  that the bill is instead                                                               
stipulating  that the  State has  the right  to regulate  firearm                                                               
manufacturing in Alaska.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS expressed favor with the bill.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG turned attention  to language on page 2,                                                               
lines [11-15], and suggested that  an amendment might be in order                                                               
to  make  that  provision  stronger,   perhaps  by  changing  the                                                               
language such  that it no  longer focuses on what  was understood                                                               
in 1959  when Alaska was  admitted to the  union.  He  then noted                                                               
that the bill  doesn't appear to address the  Supremacy Clause of                                                               
the U.S.  Constitution and  whether in  this situation  a federal                                                               
law can still preempt a state law.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MILLER, in  response  to comments,  agreed  to research  the                                                               
issues raised further.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  noted that  members' packets  contain a                                                               
copy of the proposed Tennessee law.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
8:23:06 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SCOTT HAMANN  said he strongly  supports HB 186, and  offered his                                                               
belief that Alaska should protect  its citizens from abuse by the                                                               
federal government.   In  conclusion, he  urged the  committee to                                                               
pass HB 186.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
8:24:06 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
STEVE  CATALANO  said he  agrees  with  Mr. Hamann,  adding  that                                                               
HB 186  speaks  directly  to  his  pursuit  of  happiness.    Mr.                                                               
Catalano opined that it's time  for the State to start supporting                                                               
its citizens in their endeavors to pursue happiness.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS, after  ascertaining  that no  one  else wished  to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony on HB 186.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 8:25 a.m. to 8:29 a.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS relayed  that HB 186 [Version E] would  be set aside                                                               
until later in the meeting.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HB 193 - LEGISLATIVE ETHICS ACT                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
8:30:12 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  announced that as  its next order of  business, the                                                               
committee would return to the hearing  on HOUSE BILL NO. 193, "An                                                               
Act  relating to  representation by  a legislator  or legislative                                                               
employee  of   another  person  in  an   administrative  hearing;                                                               
relating  to charity  events under  the  Legislative Ethics  Act;                                                               
requiring compensation of public  members of the Select Committee                                                               
on  Legislative   Ethics;  exempting  certain   information  from                                                               
disclosure requirements  of the Legislative Ethics  Act; relating                                                               
to the  selection of alternate  members and the  participation of                                                               
members  and  alternate  members  in formal  proceedings  of  the                                                               
Select  Committee on  Legislative Ethics  and its  subcommittees;                                                               
and defining  'constituent,' 'constituent  service,' 'legislative                                                               
purpose,'  'nonlegislative purpose,'  and  'private benefit'  for                                                               
the purposes of the Legislative  Ethics Act."  [CSHB 193(JUD) had                                                               
been reported from committee on 4/3/09.]                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS relayed that [in order  to comply with the intent of                                                               
Conceptual  Amendment  4,  as   amended,  the  drafter  developed                                                               
alternative language for it]:                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     AS   24.60.060(a)   A  legislator,   [or]   legislative                                                                
     employee, or a  public member of the  committee may not                                                                
     knowingly   make   an    unauthorized   disclosure   of                                                                    
     information that  is made confidential by  law and that                                                                    
     the person  acquired in the course  of official duties.                                                                    
     A  person who  violates this  section is  subject to  a                                                                    
     proceeding  under AS  24.60.170  and may  be subject  o                                                                    
     prosecution under AS 11.56.860 or another law.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR   RAMRAS  ascertained   that  members   consented  to   the                                                               
aforementioned alternative  language for Conceptual  Amendment 4,                                                               
as amended, which was adopted on 4/3/09.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
[CSHB 193(JUD) had been reported from committee on 4/3/09.]                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 8:32 a.m. to 8:35 a.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
HB 36 - INITIATIVES: CONTRIBUTIONS/PROCEDURES                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
8:35:29 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced  that the next order of  business would be                                                               
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE  FOR HOUSE  BILL NO. 36,  "An Act  relating to                                                               
ballot   initiative   proposal   applications   and   to   ballot                                                               
initiatives."                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
8:36:52 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KYLE JOHANSEN,  Alaska State Legislature, speaking                                                               
as one  of the joint prime  sponsors of SSHB 36,  and noting that                                                               
the bill is  very similar to legislation passed  out of committee                                                               
last  session,  explained that  in  part  SSHB 36  would  require                                                               
disclosure  of  funding  pertaining to  ballot  initiatives,  and                                                               
would require  that public  hearings be  held on  proposed ballot                                                               
initiatives.  The aforementioned  disclosure of ballot initiative                                                               
funding would  occur as  close as possible  "to the  beginning of                                                               
the  process,"  he  remarked, adding  that  the  required  public                                                               
meetings would  provide a  formal process  by which  voters could                                                               
learn about the impacts of proposed ballot initiatives.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:41:27 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SONIA  CHRISTENSEN, Staff,  Representative Kyle  Johansen, Alaska                                                               
State Legislature,  on behalf of Representative  Johansen, one of                                                               
SSHB 36's  joint prime sponsors,  offered her  understanding that                                                               
[SSHB  36] "pushes  back the  disclosure, the  times when  groups                                                               
have to disclose, from after  language is certified on the ballot                                                               
to  as soon  as  they  file their  language  with the  lieutenant                                                               
governor's office."   In  response to  a question,  she explained                                                               
that  when a  group  files  its language  and  pays  its fee  and                                                               
presents 100 signatures, the lieutenant  governor's office has 60                                                               
days  to  review  that  language and  determine  whether  it  has                                                               
constitutional   issues;  after   that  review,   the  lieutenant                                                               
governor's  office will  either  print the  petition booklets  or                                                               
deny certification of the [initiative proposal application].                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   JOHANSEN  added   his  understanding   that  the                                                               
aforementioned   disclosure  would   happen  "as   far  back   as                                                               
possible."   In response to a  question, he said that  this would                                                               
allow people to  know, "from the onset, when money  goes into the                                                               
system and who's putting the money in the system."                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  pointed  out  a  discrepancy  between  the                                                               
language in Section 1 and  the language in the sectional analysis                                                               
as it  pertained to  Section 1,  in that the  bill uses  the term                                                               
"filing"   whereas  the   sectional   analysis   uses  the   term                                                               
"influencing".   He offered his  belief that the language  of the                                                               
bill appears to only apply  to those supporting an initiative but                                                               
not to those opposing it.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN  said his  goal is  to have  every dollar                                                               
given disclosed, regardless of [the contributor's] intent.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  opined that the  bill is very  clear on                                                               
that point  and thus doesn't need  to be changed in  that regard.                                                               
He then asked  the sponsor whether he would  approve of narrowing                                                               
the title, which he characterized as too broad.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN  indicated that  he would be  amenable to                                                               
such a  change as long as  it maintains his intent  to have every                                                               
dollar   disclosed  and   provide   for   the  dissemination   of                                                               
information.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  said he  just doesn't  want SSHB  36 to                                                               
become a vehicle for "all kinds of stuff we haven't looked at."                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
8:46:48 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CHRISTENSEN   offered  her  understanding  that   Section  2                                                               
provides  language conforming  to  Section 1,  and is  "requiring                                                               
bumping  that  disclosure  deadline  back   to  as  soon  as  the                                                               
initiative's  been filed."   She  added, "This  is the  same with                                                               
Section 3."   She  explained that  Section 4  removes initiatives                                                               
from   the   statutory    provision   currently   pertaining   to                                                               
initiatives, referendums, and recalls, so  as to be able to apply                                                               
specific disclosure requirements to initiatives.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN  added that Section 5  provides for those                                                               
specific disclosure requirements for initiatives.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CHRISTENSEN offered  her understanding  that Section  5 says                                                               
that if one contributes $500 or  more, or if a group is organized                                                               
and spends $500 or more, then disclosure must occur.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  pointed out  that Section  5's proposed                                                               
AS 15.13.110(g)(2) doesn't make sense grammatically.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS surmised that a drafting error occurred.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN acknowledged that point.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CHRISTENSEN  explained  that   Section  6,  in  addition  to                                                               
relocating  some  of  the  words  in  proposed  AS  15.13.400(4),                                                               
changes  the  definition  of   "contribution"  to  include  those                                                               
contributions  made  in  support  of   or  in  opposition  to  an                                                               
initiative  proposal filed  with  the  lieutenant governor;  that                                                               
Section  7 changes  the definition  of  "expenditure" to  include                                                               
expenditures  made  in   support  of  or  in   opposition  to  an                                                               
initiative proposal filed with the  lieutenant governor; and that                                                               
Section  8  precludes  an  initiative  from  being  proposed  if,                                                               
[during  the previous  two years,]  a  substantially similar  one                                                               
failed to be approved by the voters.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS questioned whether Section 8 is constitutional.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOHANSEN acknowledged  that that  provision might                                                               
be challenged  on constitutional  grounds; although  other states                                                               
have  such a  provision, their  constitutions are  different from                                                               
Alaska's constitution.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS suggested to the  sponsor that he contemplate either                                                               
amending such provisions so that  they don't raise constitutional                                                               
concerns, or deleting them altogether.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN questioned  whether  legislative bills  that                                                               
don't pass during a given  legislature also ought to be precluded                                                               
from being reintroduced in a  substantially similar form for [two                                                               
sessions].                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN acknowledged that point.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
8:55:07 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CHRISTENSEN  explained  that  Section  9  requires  petition                                                               
booklets  to  include  a  copy   of  the  entire  proposed  bill;                                                               
currently,  if a  bill contains  500 words  or more,  including a                                                               
summary is sufficient.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOHANSEN opined  that potential  petition signers                                                               
should be able to access all of the language in a proposed bill.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CHRISTENSEN explained  that Section  10 prohibits  signature                                                               
gatherers from being  paid on a per-signature  basis, but doesn't                                                               
preclude  them  from  being paid  hourly  wages,  [salaries,]  or                                                               
bonuses.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES asked  whether paying  signature gatherers                                                               
on a per-signature basis has resulted  in a problem with fraud in                                                               
Alaska.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS shared his belief that it has not.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN offered his  understanding that fraud had                                                               
become  an  issue  in  other  states,  and  so  they'd  therefore                                                               
established other methods of payment;  although the issue has not                                                               
yet arisen in  Alaska, it seems prudent to make  such a change as                                                               
well.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG expressed  interest  in receiving  more                                                               
documentation  regarding  the  problems that  occurred  in  other                                                               
states,   and  regarding   whether  a   change  in   the  payment                                                               
methodology has chilled the initiative process in those states.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:00:55 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.   CHRISTENSEN  explained   that   members'  packets   include                                                               
information from  the National  Conference of  State Legislatures                                                               
(NCSL)  regarding  fraudulent  signature-gathering  practices;  a                                                               
couple of  such practices  include using carbon  paper in  such a                                                               
way  that  [signatures]  written  on  one  petition  transfer  to                                                               
another  petition,  or  telling  signers  they  have  to  sign  a                                                               
petition in three different places,  for example, when in reality                                                               
they  are  actually  signing  three   different  petitions.    In                                                               
response  to questions,  she offered  her understanding  that the                                                               
rationale  used  in  other  states has  been  that  if  signature                                                               
gatherers aren't being  paid per signature, they  would take more                                                               
time explaining the  issues to potential signers  and wouldn't be                                                               
so  aggressive.   She agreed  to research  whether the  change in                                                               
payment methodology  has chilled the initiative  process in those                                                               
states.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS,  remarking  on  his   past  experiences  with  the                                                               
initiative  process,  said  he's   satisfied  that  no  fraud  is                                                               
occurring in Alaska, and expressed  appreciation for the work the                                                               
Division of Elections does.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS then  relayed that SSHB 36 would be  set aside until                                                               
later in the meeting.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 186 - AK FIREARMS EXEMPT FROM FED. REGULATION                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
9:04:46 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  announced that as  its next order of  business, the                                                               
committee would return to the hearing  on HOUSE BILL NO. 186, "An                                                               
Act declaring  that certain firearms  and accessories  are exempt                                                               
from  federal  regulation."    [Before   the  committee  was  the                                                               
proposed  committee  substitute  (CS)  for HB  186,  Version  26-                                                               
LS0627\E, Luckhaupt, 4/3/09,  which had been adopted  as the work                                                               
draft earlier in the meeting.]                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
9:05:07 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANNE  CARPENETI,  Assistant   Attorney  General,  Legal  Services                                                               
Section, Criminal  Division, Department  of Law (DOL),  said that                                                               
the DOL  doesn't have  a position  on HB  186 and  has not  had a                                                               
chance to study it to the  extent that it should be, but realizes                                                               
that there may be issues with it.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES, again noting that  no state has had such a                                                               
law on  the books  long enough  for a  legal challenge  to arise,                                                               
reiterated her  concern that  under the  Supremacy Clause  of the                                                               
U.S.  Constitution, a  person  complying with  HB  186 would  run                                                               
afoul of federal law.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said those are also issues of concern to the DOL.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  said  he   is  concerned  about  other                                                               
possible legal  challenges being  raised as  well.   For example,                                                               
because   there  are   federal   regulations  regarding   firearm                                                               
manufacturing  specifications  and  the   care  with  which  such                                                               
weapons must be made, passage of  HB 186 could result in national                                                               
gun manufactures  filing civil suit  on the grounds  that Alaskan                                                               
manufacturers, as  competitors, have an unfair  advantage because                                                               
they  don't have  to comply  with  the federal  regulations.   He                                                               
asked whether the  DOL has considered civil  litigation issues as                                                               
well as criminal litigation issues.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said the DOL has  not done so yet, but acknowledged                                                               
that those issues  should be considered as well.   In response to                                                               
questions,  she  surmised  that  a  constitutional  challenge  of                                                               
HB 186 could take more than a year to resolve.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  asked whether  under  HB  186, a  national                                                               
firearms manufacturer  could come  into Alaska and  make firearms                                                               
that it would  otherwise be precluded from making  due to federal                                                               
regulations.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CARPENETI  offered  her  belief  that  in  a  constitutional                                                               
challenge,  input from  such a  company would  not be  helpful to                                                               
upholding this proposed law.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG said  he  presumes  that someone  would                                                               
first  have to  be prosecuted  in federal  court and  then he/she                                                               
could use the provisions of the bill as an affirmative defense.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI  concurred.  In  response to another  question, she                                                               
offered that as  a practical matter, the  person being prosecuted                                                               
would bear  the burden  of proving  that he/she  manufactured the                                                               
firearm in Alaska under Alaska law.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:15:07 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GATTO  made   a  motion   to  adopt   Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 1, to delete  the word "understood" from  page 2, lines                                                               
2 and  12, and anywhere else  it occurs, and replace  it with the                                                               
word "intended",  though if  a better  word can  be found  by the                                                               
drafter, to use it instead.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MIKE KELLY,  Alaska  State Legislature,  sponsor,                                                               
said he had no objection to Conceptual Amendment 1.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS removed his objection,  indicated that there were no                                                               
further  objections, and  announced that  Conceptual Amendment  1                                                               
was adopted.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 9:16 a.m. to 9:17 a.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
9:17:23 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  moved  to  report  the  proposed  committee                                                               
substitute  (CS)  for  HB 186,  Version  26-LS0627\E,  Luckhaupt,                                                               
4/3/09,   as   amended,   out  of   committee   with   individual                                                               
recommendations and the accompanying indeterminate fiscal note.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for  the purpose of discussion.                                                               
He said:                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
         We haven't really had complete vetting of the                                                                          
      constitutional issues and legal opinions, and I see                                                                       
        these being extremely significant and having far-                                                                       
      reaching ramifications that could go well up to the                                                                       
     U.S. Supreme Court.  And this could serve as precedent                                                                     
     for  all kinds  of states  asking to  be exempted  from                                                                    
     federal  regulation  on  everything  from  firearms  to                                                                    
     mosquito spray  and cosmetics and food  and ... [drugs]                                                                    
     and everything else.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  suggested  that  the  committee  needs                                                               
further information  on the constitutional  issues raised  by the                                                               
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLY said  he would  like to  see all  50 states                                                               
seek exemption from federal regulations,  predicted that the bill                                                               
will be  challenged, and acknowledged that  as currently written,                                                               
the bill would put Alaskan firearm manufacturers at risk.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  offered his  belief that  the bill  sends a                                                               
message about overreaching by the federal government.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG predicted that  during the course of any                                                               
forthcoming constitutional  challenge, the court would  find that                                                               
the committee  did not adequately  vet the  constitutional issues                                                               
raised  by  the  bill,  and   that  the  legislative  record  was                                                               
insufficient to support passage of the bill.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN remarked  that  [a review  of the  committee                                                               
discussion  thus  far]  might  make it  more  difficult  for  the                                                               
legislation to withstand a constitutional challenge.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
9:25:39 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
A  roll call  vote was  taken.   Representatives Coghill,  Gatto,                                                               
Lynn,  and Ramras  voted in  favor of  the motion  to report  the                                                               
proposed CS  for HB 186, Version  26-LS0627\E, Luckhaupt, 4/3/09,                                                               
as  amended,  from  committee.    Representatives  Gruenberg  and                                                               
Holmes voted against  it.  Therefore, CSHB  186(JUD) was reported                                                               
from the House Judiciary Standing Committee by a vote of 4-2.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  indicated that his "no"  vote was based                                                               
on  his   concern  regarding  an  insufficient   vetting  of  the                                                               
constitutional issues  raised by the  bill, not on the  merits of                                                               
the bill itself.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES said "ditto."                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
[CSHB  186(JUD) was  reported from  the House  Judiciary Standing                                                               
Committee.]                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HB 36 - INITIATIVES: CONTRIBUTIONS/PROCEDURES                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:26:47 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced  that as its final order  of business, the                                                               
committee would return  to the hearing on  SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR                                                               
HOUSE  BILL  NO.  36,  "An  Act  relating  to  ballot  initiative                                                               
proposal applications and to ballot initiatives."                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
9:27:33 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG,  referring  to  information  from  the                                                               
National  Conference of  State  Legislatures  (NCSL) provided  in                                                               
members' packets,  asked whether either  the bill or  current law                                                               
addresses the  problem of signature gatherers  using carbon paper                                                               
to fraudulently obtain more signatures.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:27:57 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SONIA  CHRISTENSEN, Staff,  Representative Kyle  Johansen, Alaska                                                               
State Legislature,  on behalf of Representative  Johansen, one of                                                               
SSHB 36's  joint prime sponsors,  offered her  understanding that                                                               
Section  12 -  which pertains  to the  certification of  petition                                                               
circulators - addresses that point.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that  more research be done on                                                               
that issue.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CHRISTENSEN  explained  that  Section 11  would  prohibit  a                                                               
signature gatherer  from collecting signatures for  more than one                                                               
petition  at a  time.   In response  to questions,  she indicated                                                               
that  this provision  is intended  to address  the aforementioned                                                               
fraudulent practice by signature  gatherers of telling a petition                                                               
signer he/she  needs to  sign in several  places when  really the                                                               
signature  gatherer  is  getting   the  signer  to  sign  several                                                               
different petitions without him/her knowing it.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR   RAMRAS  expressed   dissatisfaction   with  Section   11,                                                               
surmising that professional  signature gatherers typically handle                                                               
more than one petition at a time.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO,   noting  that   sometimes  two   or  more                                                               
signature  gatherers can  be  found in  close  proximity to  each                                                               
other, also expressed dissatisfaction with Section 11.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. CHRISTENSEN,  acknowledging that [the behavior  Section 11 is                                                               
intended to  address] was difficult  to define, relayed  that the                                                               
sponsor's  intent  is to  have  "one  place,  one time,  for  one                                                               
person."                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS,  in  response  to  a  comment,  pointed  out  that                                                               
signature  gatherers in  close proximity  to each  other may  not                                                               
relieve  each  other for  even  short  periods of  time,  because                                                               
petition booklets  are signed out  to specific  individuals; such                                                               
behavior would constitute fraud under current law.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG, referring  to  the  fraudulent use  of                                                               
carbon paper  and remarking that  the committee just wants  to be                                                               
sure  that the  signer  knows  what he/she  is  signing, said  he                                                               
doesn't   think  that   the  language   currently  in   the  bill                                                               
constitutes  the best  solution to  that problem.   He  suggested                                                               
that perhaps  language could be  drafted to  specifically address                                                               
fraudulent   signature-gathering   practices    such   as   those                                                               
previously mentioned.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
9:34:10 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. CHRISTENSEN went  on to explain that Section  12 requires the                                                               
oath that  signature gatherers  must now sign  to also  include a                                                               
statement that  they haven't solicited  signatures for  more than                                                               
one petition,  but to no  longer contain language  regarding per-                                                               
signature  payment;  the  changes  proposed  by  Section  12  are                                                               
conforming changes.   She relayed  that Section 13  requires that                                                               
public  hearings on  initiatives be  held  in at  least 30  house                                                               
districts,  and  includes  notice and  publication  requirements.                                                               
Section 14 requires that [a  sworn affidavit asserting compliance                                                               
with Section 13  - along with acceptable proof -  be submitted to                                                               
the  lieutenant  governor].     Section  15  contains  conforming                                                               
language  [as it  would pertain  to  a review  of the  petition].                                                               
Section  16 authorizes  the lieutenant  governor to  disqualify a                                                               
petition  if the  initiative sponsors  [fail to  comply with  the                                                               
requirements laid  out in Section 13].   Sections 17 and  18 were                                                               
inserted  at   the  drafter's  request;  these   sections  add  a                                                               
reference to special elections because,  depending on the timing,                                                               
initiatives  can be  on a  special election  ballot.   Section 19                                                               
requires  that a  standing committee  of  the legislature  review                                                               
initiatives  certified  by the  governor,  but  doesn't give  the                                                               
legislature any power  to amend the initiatives;  this step would                                                               
provide  a  venue for  affected  State  agencies to  voice  their                                                               
concerns with initiatives.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  asked whether a reference  to municipal                                                               
elections could be added to Sections 17 and 18.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. CHRISTENSEN  indicated that the  sponsor would  consider that                                                               
point.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
9:37:06 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHIP  THOMA,  after  noting  that   he  has  been  involved  with                                                               
initiatives for the  past 20 years but during the  course of that                                                               
work  has never  raised  money, disbursed  money,  or been  paid,                                                               
relayed  information about  two  past  initiatives wherein  funds                                                               
from outside  sources [far exceeded] that  of local contributors.                                                               
Referring to  Section 13,  he characterized it  as a  poison pill                                                               
and  punitive in  that if  an initiative  sponsor doesn't  comply                                                               
with it in exactly the right  way, the initiative will get thrown                                                               
out.   He suggested  that if public  meetings on  initiatives are                                                               
really desired, then  the Division of Elections or  the Office of                                                               
the Lieutenant Governor  should pay for them.   He predicted that                                                               
what will be  found is that the cost of  holding such meetings is                                                               
quite prohibitive,  and opined  that such  a burden  shouldn't be                                                               
placed  on initiative  sponsors, particularly  given how  low all                                                               
the other costs associated with  the initiative process generally                                                               
are.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
9:39:25 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
WAYNE STEVENS,  President/CEO, Alaska  State Chamber  of Commerce                                                               
(ASCC), stated:                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Alaska's initiative process  is increasingly being used                                                                    
     to drive up  the costs of doing business  in the state,                                                                    
     and, in some cases, to  attempt to stop industries from                                                                    
     operating  at  all.    While  a  functional  initiative                                                                    
     process  is  important in  order  to  give citizens  an                                                                    
     opportunity  to  directly  petition  their  government,                                                                    
     Alaska's   current   system   is   [opaque]   ...   and                                                                    
     susceptible  to abuse.   For  example, individuals  and                                                                    
     groups  involved  in  campaigning  for  or  against  an                                                                    
     initiative  are  not   required  to  provide  financial                                                                    
     disclosure  online;  the  public  may  be  deprived  of                                                                    
     critical  information on  election  day,  as hard  copy                                                                    
     reporting of  last minute donation and  expenditures is                                                                    
     typically not available until after the election.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     This lack  of transparency makes it  impossible for the                                                                    
     public  to  accurately  analyze  the  interests  making                                                                    
     arguments  for or  against  any particular  initiative.                                                                    
     In  recent  years, Alaska's  resource-based  industries                                                                    
     have   been  targets   of  numerous,   punitive  ballot                                                                    
     initiatives.    The  oil  and  gas  industry  faced  an                                                                    
     onerous  and  counterproductive  natural  gas  reserves                                                                    
     tax.    The cruise  ship  industry  was struck  with  a                                                                    
     passenger head  tax and  new regulatory  standards that                                                                    
     are  not applied  to any  other  discharger in  Alaska.                                                                    
     And  most  recently,  the mining  industry  battled  an                                                                    
     ambiguous  initiative financed  by undisclosed  sources                                                                    
     which many  thought was designed to  shut down industry                                                                    
     in Alaska.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     A  more  transparent  and  public  process  would  help                                                                    
     ensure the public was well-informed  prior to voting on                                                                    
     a  ballot  initiative,  thereby lowering  the  risk  of                                                                    
     unintended  consequences when  poorly-understood ballot                                                                    
     initiatives are passed.  The  [ASCC] ... encourages the                                                                    
     Alaska  legislature  to  pass  legislation  that  at  a                                                                    
     minimum establishes a  streamlined financial disclosure                                                                    
     system, including disclosure of  the first dollar spent                                                                    
     or  collected prior  to  an  initiative being  formally                                                                    
     certified for  the ballot, and online  filing so [that]                                                                    
     Alaskans can  follow the money  from the  beginning and                                                                    
     access important information prior to the election.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Secondly,   an   opportunity  for   meaningful   public                                                                    
     involvement  and  vetting  of proposed  initiatives  to                                                                    
     increase  awareness  and  ensure  the  public  is  well                                                                    
     informed prior  to voting -  e.g., the  required public                                                                    
     hearings in  a majority of election  districts prior to                                                                    
     petition  certification.     The  cost   of  initiative                                                                    
     drafting,  certifying,  and  campaigning  would  likely                                                                    
     increase if the recommended action  is [taken].  Such a                                                                    
     scenario may  be a double-edged sword  for the business                                                                    
     community  depending on  whether  the  business was  an                                                                    
     initiative  sponsor  or   opponent;  however,  a  well-                                                                    
     informed public  is less likely to  pass poorly-drafted                                                                    
     initiatives,   less-likely    to   produce   unintended                                                                    
     consequences  which could  mean significant  savings to                                                                    
     business in the long run.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. STEVENS, in conclusion, said:                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     [The ASCC} ... urges the  legislature to pass ... [SSHB                                                                    
     36]  that  makes  drafting,  signature  gathering,  and                                                                    
     financing  of ballot  initiatives more  transparent for                                                                    
     all Alaskans.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
9:42:39 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  asked whether  amending the bill  such that                                                               
it   only  addressed   financial  disclosure   issues  would   be                                                               
sufficient.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STEVENS characterized  that as  being  a first  step in  the                                                               
right direction.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES questioned  whether requiring  meetings in                                                               
30 house districts  - for example, having 2  separate meetings in                                                               
Juneau  and   25-30  separate  meetings  in   Anchorage  and  the                                                               
Matanuska-Susitna  (Mat-Su)  area  -  would  be  duplicative  and                                                               
overly expensive  compared to just  having a single  meeting each                                                               
in Juneau, Anchorage, and the Mat-Su, for example.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STEVENS offered  his belief  that if  the meetings  are held                                                               
close  to where  people  reside, more  people  will attend  them.                                                               
Regardless that having  more meetings might result  in extra work                                                               
and extra  expense, the  intent, he surmised,  is to  ensure that                                                               
people have  the opportunity to  discuss the possible  impacts of                                                               
ballot initiatives with the sponsors.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  asked  Mr.  Stevens  whether  he  would  be                                                               
opposed to  having the bill  amended such that it  would prohibit                                                               
foreign contributions for initiatives.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. STEVENS declined to answer.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  asked Mr.  Stevens whether he  would be                                                               
amenable to having  [Section 17] amended such that  it would also                                                               
apply to municipal  elections.  In this way,  voters in municipal                                                               
elections would  also receive  election pamphlets  informing them                                                               
of municipal ballot initiatives.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. STEVENS  offered his understanding  that in  Kodiak, election                                                               
pamphlets   for  local   elections  are   provided  and   include                                                               
information  about proposed  measures.   In  response to  another                                                               
question,  he  said he  assumes  that  Kodiak voters  appreciated                                                               
receiving those pamphlets.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:49:45 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARK GNADT  relayed that he  has collected many  signatures, from                                                               
Sitka to  Barrow, often for  initiatives that he's had  some hand                                                               
in.    The  initiative  process  is  very  valuable,  he  opined,                                                               
offering  his belief  that generally  initiatives  in Alaska  are                                                               
pretty widely  debated once  they are  approved for  placement on                                                               
the  ballot.    However,  to  try to  enforce  election  laws  on                                                               
something that's not even on the  ballot yet is troubling to him,                                                               
he  remarked;  once  an  initiative has  been  certified  by  the                                                               
lieutenant   governor  for   placement  on   the  ballot,   those                                                               
sponsoring or  opposing it should  have to comply  with statutory                                                               
disclosure requirements,  but not before, because  at that point,                                                               
an initiative is just  an idea.  To blur that  line could lead to                                                               
governmental  interference with  other rights  held by  citizens,                                                               
and raises  the questions,  "What are they  afraid of?"  and "Why                                                               
are we trying to make this more difficult?"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. GNADT  opined that instead,  the goal  should be to  make the                                                               
initiative  process   easier  for  the  public;   even  just  the                                                               
signature-gathering phase  of the  initiative process  is already                                                               
very  hard  even without  having  to  then also  organize  public                                                               
meetings.   If  the  intent is  to get  more  information to  the                                                               
public, then  it should be  the State's  duty make that  happen -                                                               
the State  should take on that  cost and burden, rather  than the                                                               
citizens  who are  attempting to  enact a  law that  for whatever                                                               
reason the legislature didn't.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  GNADT,  in  response  to questions,  indicated  that  he  is                                                               
familiar  with one  instance wherein  a signature  gatherer might                                                               
have  created  fraud -  that  person  was thereafter  essentially                                                               
blackballed as  a signature  gatherer; that  he's worked  on four                                                               
major initiatives;  that he votes;  that half of  the initiatives                                                               
he's worked  on were  approved by the  voters; that  instances of                                                               
fraud are unlikely to occur  in Alaska because potential petition                                                               
signers  are  vigilant  in  asking  questions  and  perusing  the                                                               
petition booklets;  that although not required,  when he gathered                                                               
signatures,  he  provided  the  full  language  of  the  proposed                                                               
initiatives; that  he supports that  provision of the  bill; that                                                               
potential petition signers generally  are not satisfied with just                                                               
a  summary;  and  that  he's   found  the  per-signature  payment                                                               
methodology to be a great motivator, much like commission sales.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG asked  Mr. Gnadt  to review  Section 10                                                               
further.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. GNADT agreed to do so.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  relayed that SSHB 36  would be held over  until the                                                               
committee's next meeting, scheduled for later in the day.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
10:01:31 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:01 a.m.