Some bills that Alaskans and their legislators considered to be priorities couldn’t be able to pass in this session for various reasons. These bills aren’t out of the question however some could be more difficult to pass in the coming year.
The Anchorage Daily News had an update recently on the major bills that were stalled and could be reintroduced in the future. The newspaper reported that the Legislature did not pass 30 bills during the session.
ADN journalist Iris Samuels says that’s a way to assess how effective or ineffective – legislators were. In addition, Samuels declares that one of the biggest differences is one that’s been around for a while.
Listen:
The transcript below has been lightly edited to improve clarity.
Iris Samuels: The most significant issue is the amount of the Permanent Fund dividend. That’s the issue that has been a source of contention in legislatures for years, beginning in the year 2016. It’s a big dispute, but it is about legislators’ differing strategies for the state’s government. Many people believe that state governments should basically provide people with the most money it can, and not do any other thing. Many people believe that the government should be doing various things. In my opinion, the dividend is the most obvious answer to that question. It’s the one question which everyone is focusing on, however there are a myriad of questions are hidden in the shadows of that one question.
Casey Grove: Yes, absolutely. The thing that held the proceedings during the session of legislatives, also known as the normal session was the idea that we had to raise school funding. How much and there were debates about what the PFD should be with regard to this increase in school funding. This is why there was a school funding boost which was approved, however it’s not for a long time. It’s possible that this issue will come up again. It will be discussed again, possibly. What can you tell me about this?
Iris Samuels: There are many legislators who view this as an important issue. There were a number of bills that were introduced at both House as well as the Senate to help achieve the objective of permanently increasing education funding. There were also discussions throughout the session regarding the issue. However, they were unable to pass the bill. However, they included the funding amount that is close to $175 million of funding, as one-time increment. The bill that is similar to this amount and is permanent. This bill has passed the Senate however, it’s not been passed by the House. Theoretically the House could return next year to pass the bill, and the one-time boost we got this year will be permanent. Another possibility is that the Senate is back, and they decide they would like to pass a new legislation that boosts the amount of education funding in theory. This is something that, as with the previous option it would need to be approved by both chambers.
Casey Grove: In relation to schools However, not regarding school funding. this was a top priority for our Republican Governor. Mike Dunleavy, there was this bill on parental rights. Do you have a clue as to the details of that bill and what happened in connection with it?
Iris Samuels Iris Samuels: So, this was a bill the governor had introduced a few weeks after session had begun. Gov. Dunleavy claims that this bill is a law pertaining to the rights of parents, however what it is doing is it focuses on sex-related education. It also limits the possibility of teaching any material that is related to gender equality or sex and gender, which means that you cannot teach anything relating to this until the third grade. After this, you must obtain written permission from the parents. There are some other provisions that would limit the rights of transgender students using bathrooms according to their preference gender. There was a massive reaction, and I believe that it’s safe to conclude this was one of the least controversial or perhaps one of the more controversial legislations during the legislative session. Since the very beginning, we knew that the bill was not going to pass, since the majority of the bipartisan Senate declared from the very beginning to the beginning that they would steer clear from social issues. They did not even set the bill for an hearing. In the House the bill was scheduled for multiple hearings. Each when it came up for public debate there was a long line of people calling in. And the majority of those who came in or spoke in person were against the legislation.
Casey Grove: There was a second bill, which actually was the result of a report by ProPublica and the Anchorage Daily News and ProPublica did on the state’s inability to investigate claims regarding discrimination against LGBTQ people. The bill was proposed to safeguard those who were discriminated against but it was never passed by the Legislature. Tell me about the bill you mentioned.
Iris Samuels: This is a concept that was introduced in the past, however this year, it gained much more attention than previously. The bill was then sent to House committees. This was quite surprising because it was to be passed by those committees, it actually had approval from Republicans. It was also the case that in the past this was actually an issue that was not a priority for many Republicans within the House. Then it came up to the House Judiciary Committee. This committee is filled with many among the more traditional Republicans that are in the House And there was Republican (Rep.) Sara Vance from Homer did not want to set it up for a hearing, and that’s when the issue stalled.
Casey Grove The reason is that there were several tax plans which didn’t get through any legislation. I believe the governor, you know, had even kind of hinted that he would to propose a sales tax legislation. We haven’t seen that. However, if this (future) session happens to occur to discuss an overall budget Do you think certain tax bills to be a part of the plan? And what can people be expecting from that?
Iris Samuels: Well, Governor. Dunleavy has told legislators that he will call them back to a special session possibly on October 1, to discuss about”the fiscal program,” which is the long-term strategy to address the state’s financial condition and the structural deficit the fact that, in essence the state is carrying more expenses than revenues to cover the costs. Therefore, it’s possible that anything relevant to these issues might be discussed during the special session. It’s worth noting that Governor Scott has said that he’s going to call this special session, however the governor hasn’t yet totally commited to the idea. We don’t have dates. There’s not a concrete plan. We believe this may occur, but it’s not fixed in stone. If they’re in a position to work together and agree to a compromise, which again is subject to governor’s decision it’s not clear what they’ll be able to come to a common understanding on. In the event that we witnessed any action on bills pertaining to revenue or taxes in the session that was in regular, we witnessed the same issues which were part of debates in previous legislative sessions.
Casey Grove: Okay, Iris, it’s summertime and the possibility that a special session appears far away. Are you anticipating an unending summer without worrying of the Legislature?
Iris Samuels: I am. The last election was a year, so this should be a refreshing break all summer long, a time when we won’t need worry about Legislature. It’s approaching. If we don’t find the answer to these huge issues facing the state this means that lots of people are in a state of uncertain times. Therefore, we’ll continue contemplate it, even if we don’t think about it all the time.
