Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1995-05-02 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1740 HB 78 The following was read the second time: 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1741 HB 78 HOUSE BILL NO. 78 "An Act relating to the maximum amount of assistance that may be granted under the adult public assistance program and the program of aid to families with dependent children; proposing a special demonstration project within the program of aid to families with dependent children and directing the Department of Health and Social Services to seek waivers from the federal government to implement the project." with the: Journal Page HES RPT CS(HES) (NT) 3DP 1NR 2AM 1015 12 FISCAL NOTES (DHSS) 1015 FIN RPT CS(FIN) (NT) 4DP 2NR 4AM 1692 8 FNS (DOE, DPS, REV, 2-DHSS, 3-DCED) 1693 2 FNS (2-LABOR) 1693 ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DEC) 1693 12 FISCAL NOTES (DHSS) 4/5/95 1693 Representative Vezey moved and asked unanimous consent that the following committee substitute be adopted in lieu of the original bill: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 78(FIN) "An Act relating to certain licenses and applications for licenses for persons who are not in substantial compliance with orders, judgments, or payment schedules for child support; relating to the duty to support children of minor parents; relating to the program of aid to families with dependent children, including the payment of aid in the case of pregnant minors and minors who are parents and the maximum amount of assistance that may be granted; proposing special demonstration projects within the program of aid to families with dependent children and directing the Department of Health and Social Services to seek waivers from the federal government to implement the projects; amending Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 90.3; and providing for an effective date." There being no objection, it was so ordered. 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1742 HB 78 Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 24, line 18, after "AS 47.25.320(a)(1) - (3),": Insert "beginning on the first day of the first calendar month following implementation of sec. 10 of this Act," Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. Representative Hanley objected. **The presence of Representative Kubina was noted. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 78(FIN) Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 24 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 2 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Absent: Foster, Williams And so, Amendment No. 1 was not adopted. Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 18, after line 27: Insert a new paragraph to read: "(5) would be ineligible for AFDC if monthly child support payments were being paid to the person for care of the child for whom 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1743 HB 78 AFDC is being received by the person, as determined under a support order that has already been established either administratively or by a court;" Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly. Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Hanley objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 78(FIN) Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 12 NAYS: 27 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, MacLean, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Absent: Navarre And so, Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representative Brown: Page 1, line 4 (title amendment): Delete "including" Page 1, line 5, after "parents" (title amendment): Insert "," 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1744 HB 78 Page 1, line 5-6 (title amendment): Delete "and the maximum amount of assistance that may be granted;" Page 24, lines 18-29: Delete all material. Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 24, line 31: Delete "8-17" Insert "8-16" Page 25, line 18: Delete "14-19" Insert "14-18" Page 25, line 31: Delete "8-21" Insert "8-20" Representative Brown moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Objection was heard. Representative Brown placed a call of the House. The call was satisfied. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 78(FIN) Second Reading Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 13 NAYS: 27 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1745 HB 78 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, MacLean, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams And so, Amendment No. 3 was not adopted. Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Brown: Page 14, after line 20: Insert a new subsection to read: "(d) When determining eligibility for, and the amount of, assistance in the case of a minor parent who is required to live in a household or living arrangement with an adult under (a) of this section, the department shall, to the extent allowed under federal law or under a waiver of federal law, disregard the income and resources of the adults in the household or living arrangement if the total income of the adults is less than 133 percent of the federal poverty line for this state, as defined by the federal office of management and budget and revised annually under 42U.S.C. 9902(2). If the department determines that a waiver of federal law is necessary before this subsection may be implemented, the department shall promptly seek a waiver." Reletter the following subsection accordingly. Representative Brown moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Objection was heard and withdrawn. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 4 was adopted. 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1746 HB 78 Amendment No. 5 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 1, line 6, after "granted" (title amendment): Insert "; relating to transitional medical assistance and child care assistance for a family that discontinues receiving aid to families with dependent children because of an increase in the family's earned income or hours of employment" Page 24, after line 9: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 16. WAIVERS FOR TRANSITIONAL MEDICAID AND CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE. (a) The Department of Health and Social Services shall, by December 31, 1995, seek appropriate waivers from the federal government to allow 24 months of continued eligibility of a person for medical assistance under AS47.07 (Medicaid) after the person, who had been receiving cash assistance under AS47.25.310 - 47.25.420 (AFDC), becomes ineligible for continued AFDC solely due to increased earned income or increased hours of employment of the person or of a member of the person's assistance unit. The continued eligibility under this subsection begins on the first day of the first calendar month following the person's last month of eligibility for AFDC and ends 24 months later or when the person becomes eligible for health care coverage under an employer sponsored insurance program or another health care option that the department determines is affordable for the person, whichever comes sooner. (b) The Department of Health and Social Services shall, by December 31, 1995, seek appropriate waivers from the federal government to allow the department to use state and federal funds under AS47.25.310 - 47.25.420 to pay for 24 months of child care services that are necessary for a person to maintain employment after the person, who had been receiving cash assistance under AS47.25.310 - 47.25.420 (AFDC), becomes ineligible for continued AFDC solely due to increased earned income or increased hours of employment of the person or of a member of the person's assistance unit. The eligibility for child care assistance under this subsection begins on the first day of the first calendar month following the person's last month of eligibility for AFDC and ends 24 months later or when the person becomes eligible for child care assistance under another program that the department determines is affordable for the person. 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1747 HB 78 (c) To the extent that the federal government approves waivers to implement (a) or (b) of this section, the Department of Health and Social Services shall implement this section and notify the revisor of statutes of the effective date of implementation." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 24, line 13: Delete "8 - 15" Insert "8 - 16" Page 24, line 31: Delete "8 - 17" Insert "8 - 18" Page 25, line 18: Delete "14 - 19" Insert "14 - 20" Page 25, line 31: Delete "8 - 21" Insert "8 - 22" Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 5 be adopted. Objection was heard. Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent to withdraw Amendment No. 5. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 6 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 17, line 15, after ".": Insert "The department may assign a person to an activity under this subsection only if the activity will help the person achieve long- term self-sufficiency." 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1748 HB 78 Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 6 be adopted. Representative Hanley objected. Representative Vezey rose to a point of order, citing Section 124 of Mason's Manual. The Speaker stated the point was well taken and cautioned the member to confine remarks to the amendment. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 6 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 78(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 6 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Absent: Masek And so, Amendment No. 6 was not adopted. Amendment No. 7 was offered by Representatives Brown and Parnell: Page 2, after line 4: Insert "a minor parent's custody of the child shall be imputed to the parents of the minor parent, regardless of where the minor parent lives, except that 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1749 HB 78 (A) if the minor parent and child live with a parent of the noncustodial minor parent, the minor parent's custody of the child shall be imputed to the parent of the noncustodial minor parent; and (B) a minor parent's custody of a child may not be imputed to the parents of the minor parent if the minor parent and child do not live with a parent of the minor parent because (i) neither parent will allow the minor and child to live in the residence of the minor's parent; or (ii) the physical or emotional health or safety of the minor parent or the minor's child would be jeopardized if the minor and the minor's child lived in the same residence with the minor's parent;" Page 2, after line 21: Insert a new subsection to read: "(h) Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, the parents of a minor who is the parent of a child are not liable for support of the minor's child unless the minor parent resided with them at some time during the 10 months immediately preceding the child's birth." Representative Brown moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 7 be adopted. Representative Vezey objected and withdrew the objection. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 7 was adopted. Amendment No. 8 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 25, after line 30: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 23. Section 17 of this Act is repealed on the earliest of the following dates: (1) July 1, 2001; (2) the effective date of any amendment of 42 U.S.C. 601 - 615 (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) that takes effect on or after the effective date of sec. 17 of this Act; 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1750 HB 78 (3) the effective date of sec. 17 of this Act if there is an amendment of 42 U.S.C. 601 - 615 (AFDC) that takes effect after March 25, 1995, but before the effective date of sec. 17 of this Act." Renumber the following bill section accordingly. Page 25, line 31: Delete "8 - 21" Insert "8 - 16 and 18 - 21" Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 8 be adopted. Objection was heard. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 8 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 78(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 8 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 26 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams And so, Amendment No. 8 was not adopted. Amendment No. 9 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 17, line 14, after "if": Insert "the family has received AFDC assistance in this state for 48 consecutive months and the family member is" 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1751 HB 78 Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 9 be adopted. Representative Hanley objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 9 was offered by Representative Davies: Change "48" to "24" Representative Davies moved and asked unanimous consent that the amendment to Amendment No. 9 be adopted. Objection was heard. The question being: "Shall the amendment to Amendment No. 9 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 78(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment to Amendment No. 9 YEAS: 15 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, Navarre, Nicholia, Ogan, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, MacLean, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams And so, the amendment to Amendment No. 9 was not adopted. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 9 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: 1995-05-02 House Journal Page 1752 HB 78 CSHB 78(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 9 YEAS: 15 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams And so, Amendment No. 9 was not adopted. Representative Vezey moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB78(FIN) am be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading and placed on final passage. Representative Mackie objected. The Speaker stated that CSHB 78(FIN) am will be in third reading on the May 3, 1995, calendar. Representative Vezey moved and asked unanimous consent that the House recess until 5:30 p.m. There being no objection, the House recessed at 1:17 p.m.