Reduced calendar could become a race against the clock in Legislature
It took lawmakers nearly every minute the state constitution affords them to get their work done last year - and that took 121 days.
Sound off on the important issues at
This year, thanks to a 2006 voter referendum, they must adjourn in 90 days. The clock starts ticking on Tuesday when the Legislature returns to Juneau.
The shortened session could become a test of lawmakers' ability to adhere to the voter's wishes, but it could also put state law on a collision course with the constitution.
For now, lawmakers must hold themselves accountable to the mandate.
But accountability in this case comes in the form of a double-edged sword, said Carl Shepro, political scientist for University of Alaska-Anchorage.
"If they want to be accountable, I don't think they'll be able to address as many issues," he said. "If they can't address issues important to you, then you'll see them as unaccountable."
Legislators remain split on how productive they can be by cutting their time in the Capitol by one-third.
Proponents say legislators will simply have to give up three-day weekends, perhaps even work some six-day weeks, but it will lead to efficient work and fewer frivolous bills.
Opponents, both Republicans and Democrats, believe the public will have less input, and time could expire on important bills. Ultimately, it will lead to more special sessions, they say.
The seeds of change started two years ago.
First, a bill to shorten the session by almost one-third failed, so two lawmakers and one former state representative took the proposal to voters, who approved it by a slim 1 percentage point.
Supporters Rep. Jay Ramras, R-Fairbanks, and Sen. Tom Wagoner, R-Kenai, say if lawmakers give it a chance, it will work.
"In 90 days we can competently take care of the state's needs without excluding public testimony and without accelerating the process in an inappropriate or unsafe way," Ramras said.
"But, if those in power want it to fail, they can make it fail," he said. "Then, at the end, they can have a chorus of, 'I told you so's."'
Rep. Mike Chenault, R-Nikiski, said the 90-day session could expose a myth that lawmakers accomplish nothing the first 30 days.
"It's not true," Chenault said. "Those 30 days mean you have more time for legislators to come down to see what's going on, see what issues are, then go back and report to constituents."
The state's constitution still permits lawmakers to meet up to 121 days. If the session exceeds 90 days, could a legal challenge await?
"I don't think we know for sure," said Tam Cook, the Legislature's top attorney. "If the Legislature does not adjourn, then you could have a challenge with validity of the laws that were passed after the 90 days.
"There is also an outside chance someone could run into court to get an order addressed to the Legislature, and then order them to adjourn."
This year, lawmakers have some heavy-hitting items on their plate: awarding a gas line contract; drafting an annual budget; more ethics bills.
The shorter session could force some yet still important bills to run short of time. Last year, lawmakers passed a sweeping bipartisan crime bill in the final days.
Whether that bill would have enough time to pass this year is doubtful, said House Majority Leader Rep. Ralph Samuels, R-Anchorage, who co-sponsored the bill.
"It could have been a casualty of a 90-day session," Samuels said. "Even if you get momentum behind something like that, it's going to be a lot tougher to do."
Samuels backed the 90-day session but today says he might not cast the same vote because even 121 days wasn't enough to get work done.
Two years ago, the Legislature had three special sessions; last year they returned to work twice.
Twelve states have no limit on the length of the legislative session, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
However, some states have made changes within the last 10 years.
According to the group:
- Nevada voters approved a constitutional amendment in 1998 that restricted the legislative session to 120 days every other year. Some sessions had lasted as long as six months.
- Kentucky voters told lawmakers in a 2000 referendum to meet every year. Prior to the vote, the Legislature met during even numbered years.
- Louisiana recently extended its limit by 15 days to meet 105 days over a two-year period (45 days in odd-numbered years, 60 in even).
But if Alaska's initiative turns out to be fatally flawed, the Legislature can repeal the initiative after two years.
Time will tell, Shepro said.
"It's really not a good situation they are in," he said. "There is very real possibility - and it's talked about quite a bit - that they will have to go into special session anyway. I'm not saying that's going to happen, but it's a likelihood."