The resolution aims to reinforce legislative predictability and transparency by ensuring that there is a clear and defined method for addressing vetoed bills. It delineates specific timelines within which the legislature must meet to reconsider vetoes, namely within the first five days of the next regular or special session if a veto message is received after adjournment. This clarity is crucial as it allows both legislators and the public to understand the timeframe for when vetoed legislation can be brought back for discussion, promoting accountability in the legislative process.
Summary
SCR13 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution that establishes the procedure the Thirty-Third Alaska State Legislature will follow to reconsider bills and items that have been vetoed by the governor. The resolution is grounded in the historical context of the Alaska Constitution, specifically Article II, Section 16, which mandates that the legislature must act promptly in this regard. It emphasizes the importance of interpreting the requirement to meet 'immediately' as a binding obligation to convene without delay when a veto occurs, thereby clarifying legislative processes during sessions.
Contention
One of the notable aspects of SCR13 is its adherence to precedents dating back to the First Alaska State Legislature. The intention behind this resolution is to prevent any ambiguity concerning the legislature's obligation to meet upon receiving a veto. Historically, misinterpretations of this constitutional clause could lead to delays in addressing critical legislative matters. Supporters of the resolution assert that this proactive approach ensures that the legislative body cannot effectively allow a veto to nullify the passage of a bill simply by delaying convening.
Notable_points
The unanimous support for SCR13 during its final vote in the Senate reflects a shared consensus among legislators on the importance of this procedural clarity. The resolution reaffirms the commitment of the Alaska State Legislature to operate under an efficient and transparent process, thereby enhancing legislative effectiveness.
Administrative Procedures Act; agency rules; requiring specific and explicit state law authorization; Attorney General review; legislative review; agency review; compliance; effective date.
Applying to the Congress of the United States to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing one or more amendments to the constitution to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and to limit the terms of office of federal officials and members of Congress.
Applying to the Congress of the United States to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing one or more amendments to the constitution to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and to limit the terms of office of federal officials and members of Congress.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Xvii, Section 3 Of The Hawaii Constitution To Specify That The Standard For Voter Approval Of A Constitutional Amendment Proposed By The Legislature Is A Majority Of All The Votes Tallied Upon The Question.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Xvii, Section 3 Of The Hawaii Constitution To Specify That The Standard For Voter Approval Of A Constitutional Amendment Proposed By The Legislature Is A Majority Of All The Votes Tallied Upon The Question.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Xvii, Section 3 Of The Hawaii State Constitution To Specify That The Standard For Voter Approval Of A Constitutional Amendment Proposed By The Legislature Is A Majority Of All The Votes Tallied Upon The Question.