Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/31/1999 02:05 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 161
"An Act relating to reduction in payments to
individuals under certain benefit programs; and
providing for an effective date."
Co-Chair Mulder observed that Tamara Cook, Legal Counsel,
Legislative Affairs Agency, indicated that the legislation
would not affect Medicaid because that is a payment to a
provider, not an individual. He noted that it was not his
intent that the legislation affect Medicaid.
MARGIE VANDOR, DEPARTMENT OF LAW noted concerns by the
Department of Law. She pointed out that the legislation
raises the question of unconstitutional delegation of
legislative authority. She observed that the legislation is
broad and pointed out that similar broad legislation was
struck down by the court. The legislation does not identify
benefit programs. She stated that the legislation provides
that "not withstanding other provisions of law" insufficient
funding would be handled on a pro rata basis. This conflicts
with existing programs that provide that insufficient
funding be handled through a reduction in service. She
stated that programs need to be identified and guidelines
provided regarding the determination of when a pro rata
basis should be done. She asserted that there is too much
left up to the agencies. She noted that it is a legislative
function to set the guidelines of appropriations.
In response to a question by Vice-Chair Bunde, Ms. Vandor
stated that each benefit program would have to be addressed
separately.
ALISON ELGEE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION provided information on the legislation in
regards to the longevity bonus program. She spoke against an
across the board pro rata reduction to the program. She
pointed out that the Administration has introduced HB 55 to
allow an income cap on the program as a fair way to address
a reduction. She added that it is difficult to determine the
actual amount of need in order to estimate when pro ration
should occur. She observed that the program might have been
unnecessarily reduced in the current year had they responded
to earlier estimates.
KAREN PERDUE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL
SERVICES testified in opposition to HB 161. She stated that
the legislation conflicts with longstanding statutes.
Recipients will not be able to anticipate the amount of
their payments. She noted that most programs have
accompanying statutes that describe the program's criteria.
There are federal protections that would prevent the
legislation from applying to some programs. She acknowledged
that the legislature does have the ability to pro rate
programs. She observed that there are a number of cash
payment programs that would be affected. The Alaska
Temporary Assistance Program (ATAP), payments to foster
parents, subsidized adoption and guardianship, and Adult
Public Assistance (APA) would be affected. She maintained
that changes should be made to programs through legislation.
Co-Chair Mulder referred to Commissioner Perdue's letter
dated March 31, 1999 (copy on file). He read from the
letter: "Our TANF Block Grant requires that we maintain
state expenditures at 80 percent of our 1994 level (MOE).
The Governor's FY2000 budget for ATAP includes only the
amount of General Funds necessary to meet the MOE." He asked
if the MOE (maintenance of effort) level is stationary.
Commissioner Perdue clarified that the amount does not
change. It is 80 percent of the amount paid by the state in
1994. Co-Chair Mulder observed that this assumes that the
amount spent in 1994 was the right amount at that point in
time. Commissioner Perdue noted that this amount was agreed
on in Congress. Co-Chair Mulder noted that Commissioner
Perdue stated that: "Any reduction to the General Fund
amount in this program would result in significant
penalties." He asked what the penalties would be.
Commissioner Perdue did not know the exact amount but
observed that the state would have to make a cash payment to
the federal government.
Vice-Chair Bunde asked if it would be more disturbing for
payments to end prematurely or to be pro rated. Commissioner
Perdue stressed that individuals are dependent on their
payments and that either scenario would be difficult.
Commissioner Perdue pointed out that community programs that
help persons with mental illness or developmental disability
are dependent on the payments. She added that the state pays
the Medicaid premiums for 8,000 elderly Alaskans.
JEANNETTE GRASTO, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE
MENTALLY ILL, FAIRBANKS spoke against HB 161. She maintained
that the programs are essential.
GENE GRASTO, NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE MENTALLY ILL,
FAIRBANKS testified against HB 161. He maintained that the
legislation is "disability cleansing." He asserted that the
state has sufficient funding to take care of the needs of
the mentally ill.
MARGO WARING, STAFF, ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH BOARD reviewed the
Board's concerns with HB 161. She emphasized that reduction
in funding levels for persons with mental illness would
jeopardize their wellbeing by threatening already low-income
levels. She observed that Alaska has been reducing the
capacity of the Alaska Psychiatric Institute for several
years, in favor of community based care. Community care
requires that persons have basic income support to live in
communities rather than in institutions. Of the 8,000 low
income, disabled Alaskans on APA, many are chronically
mentally ill. She maintained that formula programs assure
that increases and decreases do not jeopardize those already
enrolled. The Alaska Mental Health Board supports the
continuation of benefit programs that are predictable,
consistent, and provide sufficient support for individuals
with disabilities.
ERNIE DUMMANN, MEMBER, COUNCIL OF DISABILITIES AND SPECIAL
EDUCATION, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in
opposition to HB 161. He noted that he is the father of a
severely disabled child. He expressed concern that support
for his son would be reduced by the legislation. He stressed
that community based programs are extremely stretched.
JOHN WOODWARD, CHAIR, STATE INDEPENDENT LIVING COUNCIL,
ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in opposition to HB
161. He recommended that the legislation be held until
questions regarding the affect of the legislation are
answered.
SCOT WHEAT, NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE MENTALLY ILL, HOMER
testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 161. He
maintained that reductions to benefits would cause
disruptions and increase the number of persons in
institutions. He stressed that people need support in
transportation, childcare and housing in order to move from
welfare to work.
KELLY BEHEN, CONSUMER MEMBER, MENTAL HEALTH BOARD, HOMER
testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 161. She
expressed concern that the legislation could shift costs to
overburdened communities without resources.
ROBYN HENRY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE
MENTALLY ILL, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in
opposition to HB 161. She stressed that the legislation
would have grave effects upon those with mental health
problems. She stressed that the legislation could jeopardize
the ability of people to live independently and make it
necessary for people to return to institutions. She noted
that citizens receive over $1 thousand dollars in permanent
fund dividend checks.
(Tape Change 99- 58, Side 1).
KARLEEN JACKSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANCHORAGE testified via
teleconference against the proposed legislation. She urged
Committee members to reconsider. She stated that the
legislation undermines the work that has occurred over the
last two years, to get people to work. She stressed that it
would be extremely hard for homeless shelters and other
support groups to provide for individuals if their benefits
were reduced to 8 months. She maintained that there would be
an increased cost to the state if individuals were taken out
of the work place and made homeless.
Vice-Chair Bunde pointed out that the 8 or 12 month scenario
was a hypothetical condition. He had asked which would be
the least damaging to those receiving payments. Ms. Jackson
replied that if it causes them to become homeless, a one-
year time limit would be short sighted. She asserted that if
benefits are cut, the benefit will be lost.
JEAN STEELE, HOMER testified via teleconference in
opposition to HB 161. She noted that she is disabled. She
stated that she was grateful for the services that she
currently receives. She stated that the proposed bill is
disturbing in its generalities. She maintained that without
specific language, it leaves people floating in the air.
Those who are disabled and cannot work depend on these
services and cannot afford to have the state budget balanced
on their backs. She asserted that funds are being spent on
travel and highways and other things that cannot be
rationalized by those that are disabled. She stated that
further cuts could exacerbate a spiraling.
JOHANNA TORNES, HOMER testified via teleconference in
opposition to HB 161. She echoed the previous comments. She
observed that bill is vague.
JEFF JESSE, E.D., ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AUTHORITY
testified in opposition to HB 161. He emphasized that many
beneficiaries are close to the edge. He noted that
recipients have built their independence around these funds.
He stressed that individuals on the margin would not be able
to maintain their independence with reductions. He asserted
that the reduction of any programs would push individuals to
the edge. He stressed that the mental health population is
trying to put together the benefits that they receive. He
pointed out that if projections were significantly off or a
recession was to hit the state, there could be a dramatic
impact to beneficiaries. He maintained that the legislature
has to take the risk and shoulder the responsibility for
making hard choices. He stressed that the way to make the
choice is not through short funding programs in the budget
process.
HB 161 was HELD in Committee for further discussion.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|