Legislature(2005 - 2006)
2006-05-06 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2006-05-06 House Journal Page 3743 SB 289 The following, which was held over from the May 5, 2006, calendar (page 3699), was read the third time: CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 289(FIN) "An Act relating to the payment of insurer examination expenses, to the regulation of managed care insurance plans, to actuarial opinions and supporting documentation for an insurer, to insurance firms, managing general agents, and third-party administrators, to eligibility of surplus lines insurers, to prompt payment of health care insurance claims, to required notice by an insurer, to individual deferred annuities, to mental health benefits under a health care insurance plan, to the definitions of 'title insurance limited producer' and of other terms used in the title regulating the practice of the business of insurance, and to small employer health insurance; repealing the Small Employer Health Reinsurance Association; making conforming amendments; and providing for an effective date." Representative Croft moved and asked unanimous consent that CSSB 289(FIN) be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 2. There being no objection, it was so ordered. 2006-05-06 House Journal Page 3744 Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Croft: Page 32, lines 12 - 13: Delete all material. Reletter the following subsections accordingly. Representative Croft moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Rokeberg objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 289(FIN) Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 28 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 3 Yeas: Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Kapsner, Kerttula, Moses Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Elkins, Foster, Gardner, Gatto, Harris, Hawker, Holm, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, LeDoux, Lynn, Meyer, Neuman, Olson, Ramras, Rokeberg, Salmon, Samuels, Seaton, Stoltze, Thomas, Weyhrauch, Wilson Absent: Berkowitz, Joule, McGuire And so, Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. Representative Croft moved and asked unanimous consent that CSSB 289(FIN) be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 3. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representative Croft: Page 32, lines 19 - 20: Delete all material. 2006-05-06 House Journal Page 3745 Reletter the following subsections accordingly. Representative Croft moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. There was objection. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 289(FIN) Second Reading Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 12 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 3 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gardner, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Joule, Kapsner, Kerttula, Salmon Nays: Chenault, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Elkins, Foster, Gatto, Harris, Hawker, Holm, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, LeDoux, Lynn, Meyer, Moses, Neuman, Olson, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Stoltze, Thomas, Weyhrauch, Wilson Absent: Anderson, McGuire, Ramras And so, Amendment No. 3 was not adopted. Representative Crawford moved and asked unanimous consent that CSSB 289(FIN) be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 4. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Crawford: Page 35, following line 24: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 46. AS 23.10 is amended by adding a new section to read: Sec. 23.10.700. Employer Health Care Insurance. Every employer in the state that employs more than 2,000 individuals shall provide health care insurance to its full-time employees. The health care insurance shall meet adequate levels of coverage to be 2006-05-06 House Journal Page 3746 established by the department using the state employee health care insurance benefits in place as of the effective date of this Act as a model." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Representative Crawford moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Representative Rokeberg objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 4 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 289(FIN) Second Reading Amendment No. 4 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 4 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gardner, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Harris, Joule, Kapsner, Kerttula, Moses, Salmon Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Elkins, Foster, Gatto, Hawker, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, LeDoux, Lynn, Meyer, Neuman, Olson, Rokeberg, Seaton, Stoltze, Thomas, Weyhrauch, Wilson Absent: Holm, McGuire, Ramras, Samuels And so, Amendment No. 4 was not adopted. CSSB 289(FIN) was automatically in third reading. The question being: "Shall CSSB 289(FIN) pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 289(FIN) Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 38 NAYS: 0 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 2 2006-05-06 House Journal Page 3747 Yeas: Anderson, Berkowitz, Chenault, Cissna, Coghill, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Elkins, Foster, Gara, Gardner, Gatto, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Harris, Hawker, Joule, Kapsner, Kelly, Kerttula, Kohring, Kott, LeDoux, Lynn, McGuire, Meyer, Moses, Neuman, Olson, Ramras, Rokeberg, Salmon, Seaton, Stoltze, Thomas, Weyhrauch, Wilson Absent: Holm, Samuels And so, CSSB 289(FIN) passed the House. Representative Coghill moved and asked unanimous consent that the roll call on the passage of the bill be considered the roll call on the effective date clause. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Representative Gruenberg gave notice of reconsideration of the vote on CSSB 289(FIN).