Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/09/1995 02:12 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HHES - 03/09/95 HB 78 - PUBLIC ASSIST. DEMO PROJECT & DECREASE Number 056 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said HB 78 is essentially the same bill that had passed the House and Senate last year. Since last year, there has been some changes. The governor, much to the pleasure of Representative Hanley, has recognized that there needs to be changes to Alaska's welfare system. There needs to be incentives to prompt people to work, and the reasons a person may not work ("disincentives") should be taken away. The governor's bill, just like Representative Hanley's bill, has demonstration projects for workfare or community work services. Representative Hanley felt those programs were appropriate. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said the Governor's bill also recognizes that there needs to be an accountability system in place for some individuals on welfare. The bill strives to help individuals, and provide them with training and assistance for a time. However, at some point after training is received, the person will be held accountable and responsible for finding work. Number 159 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY was very pleased that the Governor has introduced a bill that has some of the same provisions contained in HB 78. The Governor's bill also contains some additional provisions that Representative Hanley agrees with. In the subcommittee process, he hopes those new provisions can be studied and perhaps utilized in a Committee Substitute (CS) for HB 78. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said the bill directs the department to seek some waivers from the federal government. At this point, welfare reform largely requires a waiver, although that may change as soon as October. There are bills currently in Congress that would potentially block grant the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. This would give the states a lot more flexibility to set up any type of program they chose. Number 227 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY cautioned that the legislature needs to be mindful of the potential for a block grant as the welfare reform bills are processed. The types of things, such as the workfare projects, that are being studied in HB 78 and the Governor's bill are still valuable. Whether they are applied as a demonstration project or across the board, the concepts are still the same and are still valuable concepts. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said whether the state receives a block grant with a lot of flexibility or the state ends up having to request a waiver, it is still appropriate to work on these issues and get some direction from a cooperative effort between the legislature and the Administration concerning where the state wants to go on these issues and how the state would like to proceed. This is so a consensus is present for whatever may occur on the federal level. Number 277 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said there are three parts to HB 78. The first part basically requests the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) to seek waivers. Essentially, the first part of the bill takes away some of the disincentives to work that are provided for in federal regulations. It seeks to provide some incentives, specifically, a waiver of the "100-Hour" Rule, and an increase in the asset allowance from $1,500 to $5,000 so people can have certain levels of assets higher than is currently the case and still be able to receive assistance. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said if a person has a car worth $1,500, it probably costs more to maintain that car than keep it in many circumstances. Representative Hanley has tried to recognize some of the changes since many of the federal rules have been implemented and allow a higher asset limit to allow people to still qualify for assistance. Number 342 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY explained that under current law, after the first couple months, individuals who are on AFDC and want to continue working are only allowed $50 of anything they make. That is an incredible disincentive for individuals to continue working. Why would a person work to make $800 or $1,000 a month when he or she is only allowed to keep $50 of that. This is a huge disincentive. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said HB 78 aims to increase the disregard to $200 instead of $50. This provides an incentive to work and make money. In addition, one-third of the remainder of the earned income is still retained by the assisted individual. Therefore, there is still an incentive to be able to receive a benefit and keep one-third of all the money they make after the $200 initial limit. That provides an incentive for individuals to work. It also provides a benefit to the state, in that the two-thirds that is not kept by the individual goes to the state and serves to offset the benefit that is being paid to the assisted individual. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said by taking away a disincentive for individuals to work and providing that incentive, they get to keep more money and improve their lifestyle and their living standards. The state, meanwhile, actually saves some money by decreasing the net outflow to that individual for assistance. This is a win-win situation. Number 432 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY continued that the second major portion of the bill is called the workfare portion. Representative Hanley thinks HESS Committee members need to look at what the Governor has in his bill and use concepts from both bills. The general idea is that any able-bodied individual receiving benefits under AFDC is required to either perform 21 hours a week of community service work or 15 hours a week of paid employment. There are exceptions to this program. A number of exceptions are the same as those included in the jobs program, and a few others are in HB 78. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY explained that reverse incentive is at work here. If an assisted person makes the effort to procure paid employment, he or she gets to work less hours to meet the qualifications for this program. This is because if he or she receives paid employment, he/she gets to see a higher income level for themselves as well as reduce the net benefits that are paid out by the state. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said this ties in with the first portion of the bill, which takes away the disincentives to work, and provides incentives. This portion of the bill makes it a requirement to work if an able-bodied person is receiving benefits. These would be demonstration projects. Number 517 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said there were three demonstration project areas around the state last year. The Governor has four different projects envisioned in this bill, in numerous different communities around the state. Representative Hanley thinks the subcommittee can work on the locations for these demonstration projects, and leave some flexibility for site options to be discussed later. Number 540 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said the last part of HB 78 was a ratable reduction. This was introduced in last year's bill. The attempt to implement a workfare program and also to allow some of the planned incentives to occur would cost the state more money. If the state is going to require people to do community service or paid work, the state must also help them with child care and transportation. A person cannot be expected to work, especially in lower paying jobs, without these provisions. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said there are some up-front costs, as well as monitoring costs by the federal government. The program does incur costs. Representative Hanley understands that the DHSS is working on the fiscal notes and should have them for HB 78 by Monday, March 13. There are costs involved, and the intent is to cover the initial cost of the program through a ratable reduction. Both AFDC and Adult Public Assistance (APA) are reduced by 1.7 percent. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY knew that this was the part of the bill that concerned many people last year. They did not feel it was appropriate to reduce payments to individuals. This is a very difficult situation for both the state and those who will encounter this reduction. However, Representative Hanley felt it is important to make some welfare reforms. With the fiscal gap of $500 million that the state is facing, it was Representative Hanley's decision to do a ratable reduction to cover the initial costs of this program so it will not require additional cuts to other areas. Number 657 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY concluded by saying he thinks there is a fair amount of work for a subcommittee to do on this bill, and he is looking forward to working with Co-Chair Bunde, other subcommittee members and Administration members to try and put together a package everyone thinks is appropriate. Number 712 CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked Representative Hanley a hypothetical question. He asked if there was an average amount for the average welfare recipient. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY asked if he was asking about the average payout in Alaska to families with dependent children. Representative Hanley said there is a chart included in the bill support documents. The maximum benefit for three persons in Alaska is $923. That is the AFDC benefit. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked how much they would receive after the ratable reduction. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY did not remember. He believed it would go down about $19 less a month. They would therefore probably receive about $904. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked how that compares with the next highest average payment in the United States. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said Connecticut pays out the next highest assistance, at $735. Vermont pays $724, and Wyoming pays $674. Number 835 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said many times only percentages are spoken of, and he wanted people to be aware of actual dollar amounts. He announced that Representative Brice joined the meeting at 2:12 p.m., and Representative Davis joined the meeting at 2:15 p.m. REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE felt the numbers that Representative Hanley was referring to were the maximum benefits that three people can receive, not the average. Representative Brice believes the average is right around $650-$700. CO-CHAIR BUNDE thanked Representative Brice for the information. There is certainly a difference between maximum and average amounts. Co-Chair Bunde said that teleconference testimony would now be taken. Number 870 MARY MATTHEWS, Representative for the Arctic Alliance for People, a human services coalition in Fairbanks which represents about 40 nonprofit and social service agencies, said the alliance is very supportive of this legislative and administrative effort to accomplish some comprehensive welfare reform. However, the alliance does oppose the ratable reduction to AFDC and to APA recipients. MS. MATTHEWS believed there is ample evidence that reducing public assistance payments does nothing to enhance self-sufficiency. Rather, it throws people further into poverty and hardship. The alliance supports the waivers mentioned in HB 78: The 100-hour rule, the vehicle waiver asset rule and the disregard of the greater percentage of earned income. These provisions are positive steps. MS. MATTHEWS continued that everyone wants the same thing--to get people into substantial jobs that will support them. This will take a well thought-out plan. One of the things Arctic Alliance feels is not addressed in the bill is the role and responsibility of the non-custodial parent. The requirements for going to work need to be changed to the noncustodial parent instead of for the custodial parent. Both parents really need to be responsible. MS. MATTHEWS said in addition, child support enforcement also needs to be included as part of the reform package. It is also important to address transitional child care and medicaid support. The bill is talking about personal responsibility for healthy families. What responsible mother would choose to take a job in which her children would not be provided with health care coverage nor adequate child care. That would not be a responsible choice. MS. MATTHEWS concluded by saying the state needs to make sure people are ready for the jobs we want to put them into. At the agency for which Ms. Matthews works, which is the Literacy Council of Alaska, there is a job training program. Many of the AFDC recipients coming into the job program do not have the basic skills, such as reading, writing and math skills, to go into the jobs that are being spoken of. MS. MATTHEWS said for someone who does not have a high school degree or who can only read at a third-grade level, it takes a while to work on and raise those skills. Ms. Matthews hopes that job or workfare programs being considered will include training and education for the participants. Alaska does not need a limited demonstration project, and it appears that is what the workfare program is. Many people involved in the jobs program feel that such a program has worked, although there may be problems that need fixing. MS. MATTHEWS feels it is a shame that every three years a good program is thrown away. This has been seen in many programs. Perhaps the state can work on improving and working on the current programs rather than keep starting all over again with a new work program. Number 1080 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said as Representative Hanley indicated, the bill will be held in a subcommittee with representatives of the Governor. The subcommittee will see if it can craft a bill that will be most effective for everyone involved. RONNIE ROSENBERG, Director of Case Management, Fairbanks Resource Agency, said she supervises case management for 60 developmentally disabled adults. She has great concerns that if public assistance was reduced by 1.7 percent, her agency would be unable to assist the agency's consumers who wish to stay in the community. MS. ROSENBERG said when one looks at proposed reductions in light of the Medicaid copayment regulations that were recently enacted, it is a great hardship to these folks whose medical bills are fairly high. These costs may also include prescription drugs, dental services, speech therapy, braces and hearing aids. These services were cut in the last round of Medicaid cuts. By further reducing public assistance, recipients have that much less money with which to pay for those very basic needs. MS. ROSENBERG understands the recipients are exempt from participating in a workfare program. Most of the people whom she serves could not participate in a workfare program, even if they wanted to. Thus, to reduce their payments to fund a program that they cannot participate in is especially unfair. Number 1170 MS. ROSENBERG said unlike some people who are welfare and who are employable for a gainful wage, most of the people she serves are already involved in vocational services. However, they will never be earning a competitive wage. They really never have an opportunity to fully get off public assistance of some type. Therefore it seems especially harsh. She is hoping that in subsequent rewrites the reduction will be crafted so that people with developmental disabilities and physical and mental disabilities, who are unable to participate in the workfare program, will be exempt from having their APA reduced. LUCI BEACH, Representative of Single Parents and Displaced Homemakers, Tanana Valley Campus, Downtown Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. She said 100 percent of the people she works with do not want to be on public assistance. They seek to remove themselves and their children from this situation. They want to be self-sufficient, and they are well aware of what they need to do in order to gain that status. Many of the people Ms. Beach works with do not have an inhibitive part of their reduction in Medicaid, just in the social services. MS. BEACH said one person is having difficulty in class because she does not have the hearing aid she needs to go to school. Ms. Beach's concern is that the reduction in AFDC assistance will further harm people. She does support the waiver, especially the increase in the vehicle value asset; and especially for people who have children. It makes their hardship even more difficult when they have insufficient transportation. Number 1277 MS. BEACH said welfare reform needs to be comprehensive. People must be given personal responsibilities and self-sufficiencies. The issue of child support needs to be scrutinized, and the responsibility of the noncustodial parent needs to be included. Additional benefits need to be incurred so people can make the transition from public assistance to self-sufficiency. MS. BEACH is concerned the economy will not be able to support all these new people that would be coming into the job market with a workfare program. Number 1324 TIM MAYBERRY testified from his home in Fairbanks. He said he is 100 percent disabled. He has been receiving assistance from the state of Alaska for several years and he represents no one but himself. He has not received a cost of living increase in his APA for several years. Therefore, he thinks that reductions have already started. MR. MAYBERRY did not have a copy of HB 78 because he cannot walk to the office to get one. However, he can write a letter, and he received the fiscal year (FY) 1995 operating budget from the Office of Budget and Management. He read some figures from that budget. He said in the FY 95 operating budget, by category, the social services occupy 14 percent of the general fund budget of the state of Alaska. The director of the Governor's office of Management and Budget says that change will be achieved by reduced entitlements and by not providing additional funding to cover increased school enrollments. Number 1390 MR. MAYBERRY said that is declaring war on the poor and on the children by directly not funding the natural increases that occur in school districts. The state operating budget from 1984 to 1985, in FY 94 dollars, went from $2.7 billion to $2.4 billion. The difference is less than the total decrease that this legislation proposes. The idea that persons impacted by this have any alternative is fallacy. MR. MAYBERRY recalled that a child care program was created in Fairbanks for parents that were AFDC recipients and were trying to work. That program was zeroed out in the last budget. There is a legal service called Alaska Legal Services who Medicaid, AFDC, APA and other state agencies recommend to persons who need legal representation. The budget contribution for these legal services was zeroed out in the last budget proposal. Number 1443 MR. MAYBERRY said HESS Committee members are not living up to their constitutional mandate. Article 7, Sections 4 and 5 essentially say the legislature shall provide for the people's welfare and for the people's health. The only way Mr. Mayberry can see benefit to assistance recipients is by reducing the amount the state pays out to the people who are on the entitlement programs, not by reducing the total amount the government spends. Number 1468 MR. MAYBERRY admitted he is not an expert. All he has to go by is the document that he received from the Office of Management and Budget. He is interpreting that document. However, when he sees benefit cuts and cuts to agencies that are supposed to help people receive these benefits, he wants to know where the logic lies in these kind of reductions. Number 1497 CO-CHAIR BUNDE assured Mr. Mayberry that there will be actual cuts in state spending. The state is facing a $500 million deficit. To not reduce state spending is to encourage the state to bankruptcy. The Constitution of Alaska does not allow that either. Co-Chair Bunde submitted that the attempts of the legislature to achieve a balanced budget do not amount to warfare on anyone. It is simply that the legislature has to address all areas of the budget. Co- Chair Bunde is sure the rest of the HESS Committee would be pleased to entertain suggestions from Mr. Mayberry about where they might move additional monies into the assistance programs and reduce other programs. MR. MAYBERRY said the opportunity to participate in these discussions with the HESS Committee members via teleconference is a Godsend because he lacks mobility. The HESS Committee members are making government accessible to him. He assured HESS Committee members that he did not think they were bad people. He only felt that fiscal attempts are misguided. The budget should be reduced. If a person writes a check and he or she does not have the money, that is illegal. Number 1568 MR. MAYBERRY still felt, however, that war does not have to be declared on the poor to balance the state's budget. He thought the process the HESS Committee members were engaged in presently is precisely the mechanism to arrive at those good cost-cutting decisions. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said Mr. Mayberry might make a suggestion to the Chair. What the HESS Committee might want to do is look at getting into the legislative rollover account, or the forward funding account, to fund some of these waiver applications. This would be done instead of cutting out ratables. MR. MAYBERRY said he understood. He thought that was a good suggestion. He wanted to know if the committee has any intention of taking anymore public participation in this process, or if the subcommittee would meet beyond the public's view. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said the bill was going to be taken into a subcommittee, and then the bill would come back to the HESS Committee for another public hearing after the subcommittee crafted a compromise that seems to meet the needs of the majority of the people. At that time, there will be another public hearing. He invited Mr. Mayberry to participate in that hearing. Number 1627 MR. MAYBERRY mentioned that before the HESS Committee members start comparing the costs of Alaska benefits with those of Vermont or Connecticut, the per capita living costs should be looked at. If a loaf of bread costs over $2.00, it is deceptive to say that people in Alaska get more money than others. There are many considerations here, and these considerations cannot be solved in this forum. It is too complicated. The sponsor of this bill is not a bad person, he is merely looking at a fiscal side, not a human side. Mr. Mayberry represents the human side. MR. MAYBERRY said again that he is 100 percent permanently disabled. He posed the question: What is welfare? The legislature says it wants welfare reduction. He again asked what is welfare. He is 100 percent permanently disabled, and so are a lot of other Alaskans. He asked that the HESS Committee members design what they consider welfare. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that cost of living differentials have been studied. At least in Anchorage, the cost of living is not that much different than any other major city on the West Coast. Mr. Mayberry agreed it was high. Co-Chair Bunde guessed that Alaska has not moved, but the rest of the United States is catching up. Number 1691 REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS commented that Mr. Mayberry alluded to the Alaska Constitution and some of the provisions and mandates. The Constitution speaks a lot about providing for the public health and welfare, it speaks about providing for the public's safety, and it requires the legislature to address education. How those things are provided can be considered in a wide range of degrees. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS asked if the legislature could provide the public with the things the Constitution stipulates by offering $1,200 a month in AFDC, or $500 a month AFDC, 5000 troopers in the state, or 200 troopers in the state? Those decisions are what legislators deal with every day. They are dealt with on the basis of how legislators perceive the public as a whole perceives those degrees. That is largely what Representative Davis goes on. Of course, the public, and Mr. Mayberry as a part of the public, is welcome to express opinions. Representative Davis appreciates that. He asked Mr. Mayberry to appreciate the position of the legislators also. Number 1750 MR. MAYBERRY asked if Representative Davis was saying that he was not willing to make policy, but he was willing to make law. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said not at all. Mr. Mayberry said he understood. Number 1800 ANGIE SALERNO, Executive Director, National Association of Social Workers (NASW), Alaska Chapter, testified from Anchorage. She said NASW is a membership organization representing 450 professional social workers statewide. She applauded Representative Hanley for the work he has done on welfare reform. The NASW agrees with the intent of the bill as seen in Section 1, which is to promote personal responsibility. That should be the goal of all public social welfare policy. MS. SALERNO said her organization supports the bill and its provisions where it truly promotes self-sufficiency. In Section 2, raising the earned income disregard, raising the auto allowance and the waiver of the "100-hour" rule are all needed reforms that begin to address the issue of making work pay. Governor Knowles has often said this. Removing the disincentives to work that are inherent in the system and offering real help is a very difficult task in getting off welfare. MS. SALERNO suggested these options be offered to all welfare recipients, instead of just those in a small demonstration project. The NASW questions why the bill also has cuts in benefits that would tend to counteract some of the very good, corrective reforms that are being suggested. MS. SALERNO directed HESS Committee members to Section 3 of the bill, entitled "Workfare." The NASW believes this section will not achieve the desired results of personal responsibility. It may, in fact, create additional social problems and expense to the state. In this provision, the state is charged with providing, or, if unavailable, developing jobs (uncompensated activity). This says to Ms. Salerno that there will be none of the rewards, like a paycheck. There will only be jobs for every able-bodied welfare recipient participating in the demonstration project. Number 1863 MS. SALERNO said the provisions for parents of children under six are noted and the NASW agrees with those provisions. What the bill is proposing is to develop a whole new system requiring administration and oversight. This bill has a provision for contracting out this administrative service. But no standards appear to be for who might receive these contracts. No standards are mentioned concerning professional training, licensure or professional regulations. MS. SALERNO said really the state will incur costs in the monitoring and oversight of such contractors. There do not appear to be any provisions for assessment of the individual going into these demonstration projects to insure that mandatory work will actually promote self-sufficiency. For some welfare recipients, things like job, family, and real-life work experience make sense in a plan to get off welfare. MS. SALERNO added however, for others a better use of state resources might be basic skill development, completion of a Graduate Equivalent Degree (GED), and/or skill training which leads to real employment. Workfare does not address the problem of personal responsibility. It may, instead, create something like a shallow economy populated by a group of people who get the message that they are unable to choose their path to self-sufficiency, the state must decide for them. MS. SALERNO stressed that this is a bad way to create working relationships with people, and it may lead to even less cooperation between helpers and those who are attempting to help. A better plan would be to utilize the existing system found in the jobs program. In this program, recipients receive thorough assessments and plans are devised to truly reach self-sufficiency goals. Basic education, job sampling and skills training is the kind of help that will achieve the goals we all share: Self-sufficiency and self-reliance for people. Number 1966 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY responded that he would like to be able to apply some of the bill's provisions across the board so everyone has the ability to take advantage of some of the benefits and is also required to participate in some of the activities that will eventually be required if the bill passes. The federal law, however, does not allow that. The federal government requires a demonstration project which is why the state must ask for a waiver from the federal government. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY noted that all of the projects that are envisioned in Governor Knowles' bills, including the community work service programs, also require waivers. These are also demonstration projects that are not applied across the board. That is a federal requirement. Number 2000 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said a lot of people are clearly opposed to the reductions to pay for the programs. He understands that. But one of the questions that has often come up is why don't we simply put more money into the current jobs program? Representative Hanley does not feel the average person, nor the people in the programs, think the current system works. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said some people do get off assistance, and the jobs program does work for some individuals. There has been a General Accounting Office study of the jobs program done on the federal level. The money that has been spent in that program has not been effective. The same results have not necessarily been seen in Alaska because Alaska has not implemented the jobs program long enough to make a determination either way. Number 2034 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY continued that what has happened in many communities is people have had the education and training, and they do get off assistance and get a job for about a year. Then, they end up back on the system. Many of these people are then still on the system. It is important to look at those results when you consider the dollar amounts that are being invested. It is important to see whether the current programs and system works. The state needs to always be critical and examine the programs in place. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said numbers have been put together relating to the savings of the Alaska jobs program, because the program does work. There are definitely success cases in all these programs. Representative Hanley did not have those numbers with him. However, the numbers ranged from a spending of $10 or $15 to one of dollars spent that were actually saved by getting people off welfare. Number 2068 REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said the whole point is to give people who are able to work the ability and the incentives to work and give them a job. That is the way to reduce the welfare rolls. The state must get people working. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said his intent was to create something different than the jobs program. Particularly if it is required by the federal government to do demonstration projects, he wanted to do these projects in small areas to study what works for some individuals. He also wanted to see what does not work. The bill was for the state to continually learn, utilize that expertise, and refine the processes. Number 2093 MS. SALERNO understands the jobs program is presently providing mainly pre-employment services. The state of Alaska has not funded the jobs program to the extent it could. It is also Ms. Salerno's understanding that there is absolutely no money spent on actual skill training for recipients. Any person in the jobs program who wants skill training must access the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) system. MS. SALERNO explained that the JTPA system is funded by federal dollars that offer education in vocational and postsecondary education. In Anchorage, only 2 percent of eligible people can access the JTPA program because of the low funding received from the federal government. When people receive work and then fall back into welfare, she attributes this to low skills and low pay work. A recipient must struggle to maintain a family. They find they cannot make it work for them, and therefore they come back to assistance. This creates a revolving door. MS. SALERNO believes that revolving door is a function of not providing the kind of help necessary at the beginning of the process. This help includes assessment, real skill training, and more on-the-job support. Ms. Salerno worked in job training for five years, and she has seen women who try to stay in jobs. But when problems arise, they do not have the resources to get through those problems. The state must give them additional help to stay in work. Number 2171 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a statement relating to the Alaska Works Program within the Department of Labor. This program coordinates the jobs efforts with the DHSS. Representative Brice believes they put out statistics that estimate there has been a savings to the state of close to $14 million. This is because of investing into these types of jobs programs over the long term. Number 2200 PUDGE KLEINKAUF, Attorney and Master in Social Work (MSW), testified from Anchorage. She thanked Representative Hanley for his ongoing efforts in positive and constructive welfare reform. She made some recommendations regarding HB 78. She urged the HESS Committee members to maximize the numbers of people included in the waivers if at all possible, and to make that waiver available to as many recipients as possible under the federal regulation. She asked that waivers not only include those people who are in the demonstration project, if possible. MS. KLEINKAUF also urged HESS Committee members not to include a ratable reduction in the bill. She believed it is, at minimum, unfair. It is also possibly unconstitutional to penalize an entire group of recipients by reducing their benefits in order to generate an amount of money used to run a project that benefits only a very few number of recipients. Number 2235 MS. KLEINKAUF urged HESS Committee members to avoid the constant effort that is being made to differentiate between people on APA from those on AFDC, and to exempt people who are disabled because they can't work. She asked HESS Committee members not to penalize only people on AFDC by ratable reductions or other actions. She said the people on AFDC tend to be over 24,000 poor children and their custodial or caretaking parents. MS. KLEINKAUF asked Co-Chair Bunde to announce the members of the subcommittee so those interested will be able to work with the subcommittee and be advised of its activities. She also urged HESS Committee members to look, in much more detail, at the idea of running these projects through contractors. That simply increases the administrative costs. It also raises the issues of inconsistent programs and program standards. It diverts the attention the department should be putting toward assisting recipients to managing the contracts and grants. MS. KLEINKAUF said she is not sure that contracting services are the best or cheapest way to go. She thanked and congratulated Representative Hanley for maintaining in HB 78 the recognition that any work activity must include child care and transportation expenses. Ms. Kleinkauf said she would answer questions and volunteered to help with revisions of the bill. TAPE 95-17, SIDE B Number 000 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said he would make the scope of the proposed projects as wide as legally possible within the federal guidelines. REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY had to leave for a meeting. He said he would try to come back down to the HESS Committee, but someone from his staff was also currently present. Number 057 HOSANNA LAHAIE LEE, testifying from Anchorage, said she is unfortunately a recipient of both AFDC and APA. She was able to work her way off the program many years ago, but she is back on it today. She said it is very shaming and difficult for her to read in the newspapers and hear the labels that people on assistance receive. She gives back to the community through volunteering. She does not know of any person on welfare who would not wish for it to be different. MS. LEE said her plea to HESS Committee members is that some sort of subcommittee convene to speak with recipients and find out what they want. Let recipients be proactive in coming up with solutions. The one thing that is missing in these programs is the hope that many people have. Ms. Lee said she is an intelligent woman, but her self-esteem has suffered. She wishes it was different, and she volunteered to help with further negotiations on the bill. MS. LEE agreed that reforms are needed. However, she thinks that the truth about the availability of these programs and who they are targeted to serve is not being told. She has tried to get into many of these programs. She wishes that recipients would be included in negotiations because they need to have a voice. People working together can get things done. Groups that consist of "us" and "them" do not work effectively. Number 211 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said including recipients in the process is what the committee is doing currently. He also announced that Representative Rokeberg joined the meeting at 3 p.m. BARRY BURNETT, assistance recipient, has many suggestions on welfare reform. He and his wife are both disabled. The state should change its laws. He agrees with Representative Hanley concerning the waivers, but he does not think the waivers go far enough. If he works and makes $600, his wife's assistance gets cut back $3 to $5 for every dollar that he makes. Allowances should be made for families with disabled members. MR. BURNETT said the current situation is forcing him into bankruptcy. He has already started filing for bankruptcy. He does not think it is fair the welfare departments or social services programs have a right to force anyone into bankruptcy. Number 348 MR. BURNETT said a family of three, like his, should be allowed to have $50,000 per year of income. This is without any deductions for disability payments that the disabled family member is receiving. This will help cover the costs of what has already been cut from medical payments, eyeglasses, dental, and prosthetic assistance. MR. BURNETT continued that if a family has more than three members, the state would add $1,500 per person. That gives a family a chance to live without being harassed by bill collectors like Mr. Burnett is now. Recipients can live with dignity. If Mr. Burnett goes back on AFDC right now, the state is paying out more money. It is time to stop that and allow families to have money so they can make a living, not for their wants but for their daily needs. Transportation, housing, food and clothing are daily needs. Number 449 MR. BURNETT wanted to know how he is supposed to live on $800 a month, when he must pay $980 for rent, $450 in food, and $250 for transportation. He asked what is left over. Nothing is left over. He asked HESS Committee members to look at this. MR. BURNETT said that it is not just his family, but a lot of families that are in the same boat. The state should do something about this now, instead of sitting and waiting. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said she appreciates the fact that Mr. Burnett is testifying, because she knows it is hard for him. However, the state is in the same boat that he is in. There is not enough money to pay for everything. The legislature is trying to spread the state's dollars in such a way that it is fair for everyone. For whatever budget is being discussed, the committees get a room full of people saying exactly the same things. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said the legislature must cut budgets not because it thinks recipients are not trying or are cheating the government. The legislature is cutting budgets because the state does not have the money. But with Mr. Burnett's suggestions, and the suggestions of others who are testifying, perhaps a solution can be worked on. Number 540 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said Mr. Burnett's suggestions can be looked at so when he makes $600 a month, the state can add to the amount to equal what is being made now when he is not working. But the legislature is investigating cuts because it has no choice. Co- Chair Toohey stressed this to Mr. Burnett. These cuts are being made because the legislature does not have a choice. There is no choice, the money is not there. MR. BURNETT understood what Co-Chair Toohey was saying. He said that every time he has come to the state and asked for help and change, he has been told that it is a federal problem. When he goes to the federal government, he is told it is a state problem. He has been trying for 20 years to find out what can be done to change the system on a federal and state level. Nothing has been done. Number 600 MR. BURNETT understood Co-Chair Toohey's point. He suggested that fathers who are delinquent on child care payments be put on public service jobs to build roads that are badly needed in this state. He suggested that those men should be paid a decent wage and then the state should dock their pay. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked who those delinquent fathers would be putting out of a job. MR. BURNETT said those people would not be putting anyone out of a job. He said the state should create jobs by building new highways and repairing roads that are needed. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said if the state had the money to build new roads the state would currently be doing it. The state does not even have the money to start new roads. Number 655 MR. BURNETT said if he goes back on welfare, the state is paying out more money. There are a lot of people like him who are stuck in this position. He estimates that the state can save $1,200,000 by allowing families to have $50,000 or so to live on. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said that tangential to what Mr. Burnett was talking about is the waivers, the Tefra Option and the Project Choice waivers that the state has implemented in the past. The state has realized honest savings in the community and the services the state is required to provide through Medicaid, Medicare and various other programs. These programs have shown a savings to the state, yet the state will not fund them at the minimal level to keep them going. Or, the state will not fully implement them, because they were all cut out last year. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that Co-Chair Toohey was speaking of "getting blood from a turnip." Co-Chair Bunde told Mr. Burnett he understood his frustration, and that is why public testimony was being taken. The HESS Committee is trying to come up with solutions that encourage, rather than discourage people. He assured Mr. Burnett that he was part of the process and part of the solution by testifying. Co-Chair Bunde appreciated his input. Number 747 MR. BURNETT said when the state's welfare rate was at $825 for him for AFDC, he was supposed to receive a 5 percent increase that would have brought him up to $840. The state cut his assistance back so that he only received $805. The state has not, since then, given him a cost of living increase. This has placed him further into debt. MR. BURNETT said he tried to go to work, and now he is being punished by the state for trying to work to pay his bills. He cannot pay his bills because Social Security and APA cut payments to his wife. He asked, if he only makes $600 and his wife gets $200 of her assistance, how he was supposed to live on this amount of money. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said these are the problems that the legislature is attempting to address. Number 830 DAVID STRONG said he was severely disabled. He has a problem with cuts taking place across the board. He agrees that something has to be done, but he is not sure what it is. He does not think that cuts are the answer. Medicaid has been cut, which means the disabled have to pay a portion of their money to doctors. This is okay, but if the disabled do not have the money to pay the doctors, they do not know what to do when they get sick and Medicaid doesn't pay for their care. MR. STRONG asked how he can pay with money that he doesn't have. He asked if he was supposed to sit on the street and be sick if a doctor refuses to help because Mr. Strong cannot pay due to cuts in Medicaid and Medicare. He said there has already been so many cuts that "we are about ready to bleed to death." Somebody needs to stop this. Mr. Strong is not sure if the federal government or the state is responsible. MR. STRONG said it is time someone said, this is not your problem, it is our problem. We will work on it together and come up with a solution. There is too much blame shifting going on. People need to sit down as a body of the state and of the country and recognize the problem. They need to ask, what are we, as a whole, going to do about it. Number 946 CO-CHAIR BUNDE reminded Mr. Strong that is what the legislature and the HESS Committee was trying to do. They are trying to come up with a solution. BERTHA STRONG, wife of David Strong, said she has three different families in Japan. Her first husband comes from a family of six. He also has aunts and uncles. Ms. Strong's father and mother both have family in Japan. She asked why Alaska sent aid to the earthquake victims, when the legislators say there is no money. Japan refused the assistance, and called Alaskans "Yanks." Ms. Strong said they do not like Americans in that area of Japan, where there is a naval base. MS. STRONG said the assistance money was turned around to a nonprofit agency which bought blankets with the money. The blankets were then sent to Japan and accepted. She asked about those in need of assistance in Alaska. She asked about the "little children," and then named some of those children. She said the legislature cut from a disabled person, and made their dignity diminish even more. Number 1035 MS. STRONG asked why state employees can deposit bank checks into banks, but people on public assistance cannot. She said the state would save a lot of money that way, through direct deposit. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that is a program he has been supporting. MS. STRONG said she needs an answer to these questions. She asked why aid is given to other countries when people are in need in Alaska. She said that those in need are American citizens and Alaskans. She asked why money went out of state, and why jobs are being given to people from out-of-state when people in Alaska cannot get off welfare. Number 1090 MS. STRONG said she is from Anchorage, and she came here on the Key Campaign. Access Alaska paid her way to Juneau, but next year she is going to come back to Juneau and bring her disabled son. She said she will keep on hounding the legislators because her level of dignity is getting lower and lower. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said he cannot answer her question concerning why the state sent money to Japan. That was an administrative decision that came out of the Governor's office. He said that was a good question, and if he finds an answer he will pass it along. Number 1145 BARBARA TURNER, assistance recipient, said when she moved to Juneau from Anchorage, she lived in a nursing home. She has been on public assistance for a long time. She cannot afford the proposed cuts. She has a medication that keeps her alive, because she has a form of cerebral palsy. She cannot afford this medication. It costs her $6.00 for 5 different medications. She is $4,000 in debt to Bartlett Hospital, and there is no way she can pay this bill. MS. TURNER said she has a personal care assistant (PCA) that takes care of her. If the PCA program is cut, she will be paying for that also. She does not know what she will do if assistance is cut $26. She pays child support. She recalled that previous testimony referred to child support enforcement of the noncustodial parent, and she is the noncustodial parent. She paid $100 every month for 2 children, and she wanted to know how she was going to make ends meet on about $700. Number 1230 MS. TURNER said she is really coming up short. Medicaid did not cover treatment for her pain, and she is getting the "sticking end of the stick." She cannot afford to get her braces taken care of right now, and she might have to pay for the flight to get them taken care of. There are many extra cuts. She cannot afford to buy new glasses due to all the Medicaid cuts. MS. TURNER said if $26 is cut, she cannot afford to go to a doctor if she has one of her seizures. Barry Burnett, who testified previously, is her brother-in-law. He has taken Ms. Turner to the emergency room several times when she has had seizures. She is charged for emergency room care every time she goes. She cannot afford the hundreds of dollars they charge. She does not know what she is going to do. CO-CHAIR BUNDE appreciated her input, and assured her that the HESS Committee members did not have the answers either. That is why everyone is working together to find those answers. Number 1293 JANET BOYD, Case Manager at Fairbanks Resource Agency, testified from Anchorage. She said her agency serves children and adults with developmental disabilities. The individuals she works with are currently learning job skills and earning wages either by contract, through trade or through community employment. Their wages are now applied to their care. Somewhere down the road they will be working a full eight hours in a competitive wage job. At this point in time, however, the majority of them are not in this capacity. MS. BOYD said by further cutting APA benefits, the legislature is further cutting their ability to maintain their independence, self- esteem and pride. These people are working hard and they are able to carry their weight. They are a vital part of the community. MS. BOYD said cutting benefits to disabled APA recipients is asking them to deal with further hardship. They are already dealing with a disability, and they are out there working. This concerns Ms. Boyd. Everyone has heard a lot about the Medicaid cuts. Her agency is almost seeing an adverse effect on the long-term medication for seizures, mental illnesses, etc. There are a variety of reasons why people are on and will be on long-term medication. Oftentimes, these medications are very expensive, and only one type of medication may work to prevent frequent seizures. Number 1366 MS. BOYD said the recipient has to pay for this medication and pay other costs. Again, these costs are cutting into what these individuals are barely able to make. Ms. Boyd would like to see APA recipients that have disabilities excluded from contributing to the workfare program. She spoke on behalf of those that are not testifying today. Number 1400 JOHN LOVE, Case Manager, Fairbanks Resource Agency, stated via teleconference from Fairbanks, that he opposes HB 78 as it stands. As Janet Boyd pointed out, he understands that cuts in aid to the disabled are to be applied toward workfare programs. Very few if any people with developmental disabilities will benefit from workfare programs. The reality is that many of these folks may never earn a competitive wage on which they can live. MR. LOVE said this is not because of an unwillingness to work, but rather because disabilities limit the types of traditional work these people are able to pursue. These folks are dependent on assistance. They have not only their disabilities to contend with, but recently they endured decreases in Medicaid services and decreases in assistance for medication and doctor visits. Mr. Love believes public assistance decreased a few years ago. MR. LOVE added that all the while, the cost of living continues to rise. For these reasons, he opposes HB 78. Number 1480 LORAENE PHILLIPS spoke on behalf of her son. She thanked the committee members for letting her speak. She is from Fairbanks and is the mother and advocate of her son who is developmentally disabled. He is learning disabled, has a seizure disorder and has a communication disorder. He is on a waiting list for services for those with developmental disabilities. MS. PHILLIPS said her son is a very difficult child to handle, and he is actually now a young adult. He has been told by the school system and other agencies that he is an adult and he can make his own decisions. Therefore, one of the decisions he has recently made is to move out of his home. This is very difficult for Ms. Phillips' family. He is really not capable of living alone. Number 1520 MS. PHILLIPS continued that because of the cuts that may happen in other programs, he is not getting the support he needs to live alone. He does not have anyone to come in and help him manage his money, except for Ms. Phillips. Ms. Phillips also has another child, a daughter, who is severely handicapped. She is 14. She takes up 90 percent of Ms. Phillips' time. She requires total care. Therefore, it is hard for Ms. Phillips to travel across town to check on her son sometimes. MS. PHILLIPS said there has been instances when she has been called on the phone by her son's understanding landlord. In these instances her son has gotten into certain situations that could have been avoided if he had someone there, such as an aide or friend that could keep him from getting into these situations. MS. PHILLIPS said because of her son's disability, it is very hard for him to manage his money. Even when Ms. Phillips is helping her son manage his money, it is still difficult to make ends meet. Her son receives Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and APA which equals out to be about the same assistance as everyone else receives, about $800. After he pays his rent, his utilities, telephone bill, transportation, and Medicaid co-payments, he has no money left. Number 1591 MS. PHILLIPS added that if her son could work, it would help his situation. But because of the cuts and the hole in the money from the other agencies from which he could receive help, he is not trained to work. Therefore, her son is receiving a "double whammy." In the process, his self-esteem is low and his frustration is greatly enhanced. MS. PHILLIPS said she was asking the committee not to cut the money that her son was receiving. She does not see how it would benefit him or any of the young adults who are living independently. Ms. Phillips has been at the Key Campaign and she has been visiting with some of the young adults at the campaign who have been receiving these monies. She has been listening to them talk about their needs and how they cannot buy certain things. Number 1638 MS. PHILLIPS said some of those young adults are even already in a program in which they are working so many hours a day or week. But these young adults are still not able to make it. She is here to ask the committee to take a really good look at what is going on. MS. PHILLIPS felt that some of the things being implemented or proposed are good things. Work incentives are good ideas. Ms. Phillips also wanted to comment on the jobs program and workfare. If there was going to be a similar program in place, she would surmise that the state would double its spending. The state would be spending money on a few different programs. The state would be paying child expenses for daycare already on the jobs program. Then the state would also be paying for child care and transportation for the workfare program. She feels that is simply double the cost to the state. Number 1677 MS. PHILLIPS asked if the programs could be combined in some way. She asked if the jobs program could be studied to find out why it is not working. She does not think it would be in the state's best interest to be paying for two separate programs at the same time. She feels that would be simply doubling the costs to the state. She wanted to ask HESS Committee members again to take a very good look at the people who have disabilities, and to be sympathetic to their issues. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked how old Ms. Phillips' son was. MS. PHILLIPS said her son is 19 years old. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said that Ms. Phillips is going through what everyone has gone through, empty-nest and separation syndrome. Whether or not a child has a disability, all parents go through that. She asked if there was any chance that Ms. Phillips' son could get a roommate. MS. PHILLIPS said she has looked into family members as roommates, and she has looked into friends. However, it is hard to find someone that is trustworthy. Her son chose a roommate previously, and that person took advantage of her son because of his disability. He doesn't see things that are coming at him. Although his family tries to warn him by saying, "That person is not the right type of person for you to be around," it does not do any good. MS. PHILLIPS said she can explain why that is. He has been in other programs, and because of his learning disability and his communication disorder, he is sometimes not capable of understanding what is going on, and what the people are trying to do for him. He is very difficult, at times, to work with. So those individuals will stop working with him. What he sees is someone starting, and all of a sudden, they quit. He may gain a rapport with them, but then all of a sudden they are no longer there. Number 1765 MS. PHILLIPS said this makes it even more difficult for people to reach him. Ms. Phillips has suggested roommates. He had the roommate that he picked and they thought maybe it would work. It did not, and her son was left with a rent bill that her family had to help him pay. There are a lot of issues involved. MS. PHILLIPS said she would leave HESS Committee members her name and address, and she said she would do anything to help solve the problems facing the HESS Committee. She thanked Co-Chair Toohey for her concern. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said there would be another public hearing when the subcommittee work is done on HB 78. He said that everyone will be notified, and that collectively, "we are smarter than we are individually." LYNN KORAL, Representative of the Alaska Independent Blind, testified from Anchorage. She is concerned with the bill as it presently stands. She applauds efforts to provide people with a decent wage while they are trying to work. She said that providing child care and transportation will certainly take a load off the parents. But it is not right to cut the benefits to people with disabilities to pay for what the benefits of the program may or may not do. It does not seem to be the wisest choice people can make in light of cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. MS. KORAL added that many disabled people have to pay for transportation over and above what many able-bodied people have to. They are not able to have their own transportation. They may have some trouble with transportation considering the fact that many have other medical problems, such as multiple disabilities. MS. KORAL thinks that there must be some other ways that changes can be approached. She thanked HESS Committee members for the opportunity to speak. Number 1870 DONNA BURNETT, wife of Barry Burnett, said it would hurt the disabled to cut assistance any more. She is disabled and she has no skills. It would cost more money to copy a program that is already in place. She said what is needed is a "checks and balances" system to address what is already out there. It is important that jobs and programs are not being duplicated. It would hurt her family if assistance is cut. MS. BURNETT asked HESS Committee members to take HB 78 negotiations case by case. She asked them to look at the cases and listen to people who are on the programs so the state is not duplicating programs and spending more money. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that was their goal, to do more with less. Number 1945 JENNIFER REYNOLDS, parent of a developmentally disabled son, came to Juneau with the Key Campaign. Her son will be 10 years old next week. Her family applied for SSI for her son, and he is currently receiving Medicaid. To receive SSI, the family must have a very low income. The income must be under $1,400 a month. The family has been on AFDC before. Her husband is on federal workers' compensation, and the family is trying to resolve that. It has been going on for four years, and is very complicated. MS. REYNOLDS said she was in Juneau to talk about her son, his Medicaid and his permanent fund. She agreed that welfare reform may be needed, but there does not need to be cuts to children or adults with developmental disabilities. That is cruel and unusual punishment, and it is unconscionable in her opinion. Number 1986 MS. REYNOLDS said it is hard to look at her son and tell him that he cannot have a permanent fund, or that his parents cannot put one-third of it away for his education because he is developmentally disabled. It is also wrong to do this, and she is shocked at this. MS. REYNOLDS stays home and takes care of her son. She does not get paid for nursing services. She is his advocate. She goes to his school and works there. She goes to his doctor's and psychologist's appointments, and all the other appointments that he needs. She takes care of him, and it is a very big job. Part of this job entails talking to legislators to say he needs his funding because he is developmentally delayed. Number 2012 MS. REYNOLDS said her son has continual medical bills. She is in the process of applying for waivers and options. This is a huge job. Her child continues to need medical care and he has continual medical bills. MS. REYNOLDS does not think she has to be in poverty to support him and his needs. She feels badly that her son's future and permanent fund dividend is in jeopardy because he has been labeled developmentally disabled. Labels are something that everyone has tried to get away from, but at some point her son had to be labeled certain things. She has been frightened away from the label "SED," severely emotionally disabled or severely emotionally disturbed. That is something that no one wants their children to be labeled. MS. REYNOLDS thought "developmentally disabled" was not quite so bad a label. However, when people are jeopardized because they are labeled, that is really sad. Number 2066 LEIGH HAGSTROM said she is an AFDC recipient. She said she is one of the people that is currently perceived as unworthy or greedy versus needy. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said that Ms. Hagstrom was before a neutral body of people who are trying to do a job. Co-Chair Toohey said she has never called Ms. Hagstrom greedy, and she does not intend to. Co- Chair Toohey said she does not need to call Ms. Hagstrom anything, but a recipient sitting before the HESS Committee, testifying. She asked Ms. Hagstrom to please not start off on such a negative note. Co-Chair Toohey said she is only trying to do a job. MS. HAGSTROM said she did not think she was intentionally implying that Co-Chair Toohey used those labels toward her, but there are labels and stereotypes that often guide policy that affect people like her. She is a full-time student with a four-year-old son. She feels it is unfortunate that she would be one of the persons exempt from the workfare program because of her four-year-old son, and therefore her assistance would be cut to pay for these programs. She is already doing it on her own. There will be cuts to her benefits to help somebody else. MS. HAGSTROM said it is extremely unfair for people who are already doing it on their own and working, or are not able to work, to have their benefits sliced across the board to fund these programs. Perhaps if the jobs program was studied, the state could find out what was wrong with it. Ms. Hagstrom said, "You don't throw a car away because it has a flat tire." Number 2124 MS. HAGSTROM wondered, with all the exemptions for people who work at least 15 hours per week, the disabled, and people who have children aged six or under in the home, how many people will be left over that will be required to participate in the workfare program. She asked if the number of people and the work they provide will be comparable to the money it would take to help the jobs program. In other words, would it be worth it to spend more money on something new for a select number of people rather than to fix what is already in place. TAPE 95-18, SIDE A Number 000 KIM DUKE, Legislative Aide for Representative Hanley, said she would have to check with the DHSS to find out specific numbers. HB 78 was introduced last year, and since then the numbers have changed. They fluctuate month by month, much less year by year. The point of the project, however, is not to implement it for a short period of time. In order to make a change to welfare in a state, the state must implement a demonstration project and make recommendations to the federal government. That is the only way permanent change can be realized. MS. DUKE said the workfare demonstration project is a temporary thing, it is only a two to five year project. It is not a change that is going to be implemented in the state permanently. This is a sample that is being taken to get statistics. Number 074 MS. HAGSTROM asked if in other words, the state is trying to spend money it does not have on a project that may or may not work. MS. DUKE said funding for the demonstration project is being provided by the cut in benefits. This is the only way the state can attempt to shape welfare. Because welfare is a federal program, the state is limited in making changes. Number 117 MS. HAGSTROM said she looks at all the exemptions to participants in the workfare program, and she hears about the money crisis, how benefits have to be cut and how all programs are going to get cut this year. She wanted to know how many people are going to be served, and is it worth it to have that much more money come in from a different source rather than adapt and redo the jobs program. The jobs program has a waiting list of people who want to be involved, but because the funding is not there they are just sitting at home waiting. MS. HAGSTROM asked why problems in the jobs program are not being investigated. She thought that would be better than taking a chance on something that may or may not work, while at the same time cutting everybody's benefits in the process. Number 160 CO-CHAIR BUNDE thought that it was a given, both nationally and statewide, that the current system does not work. The working poor and the middle class are not happy with the way the system is. The people who are paying the bills are not happy. They want some changes, and that is why those at the HESS Committee meeting were present. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said in order to realize those changes, the federal government requires the state to do a demonstration project. Perhaps, the federal government in the near future will simply provide a block grant to the state, then these studies will not have to be done. The state can then simply make the changes that it collectively thinks will be most appropriate. MS. HAGSTROM found it very ironic that no one who seems to know what is best for the welfare recipient has asked her what would be helpful. All she has received is labels in the newspaper, and stares in the grocery stores, and the humility of going to school and working. Ms. Hagstrom said she is a voter, and she is very frustrated because no one is asking her what to do. She urged HESS Committee members to ask the recipients about changes. MS. HAGSTROM said she is using her aid on the short term. She has gone to school on her aid. Number 250 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said that is why the HESS Committee is having these meetings, to get input from the public. MS. HAGSTROM agreed, but said she is in a very lucky position, because she could come to Juneau and testify. Number 273 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked for a clarification. He said that money saved from cuts will be used to pay for the programs. The cuts are going to take place regardless of whether the federal government accepts the waivers or not. They won't come back into effect for quite sometime. MS. HAGSTROM said that is very unfair, especially with the co- payments. People talk about personal responsibility. In her personal situation, the best thing for her to do was to go to school and get an education. No matter what happens to her in the future, no one can ever take that learning away from her. That was her responsibility to herself and her family. MS. HAGSTROM said the amount of time she has been on AFDC is the same amount of time she has been in school. It has taken her five years to get a four-year degree, and that is what she has used her aid for. She gets to the point when she sees negative things about welfare recipients that she just wants to be left alone. She said she is doing what she is supposed to be doing. MS. HAGSTROM hears that everyone should get off assistance and get a job, and she will be getting a job. She does not need to read the paper and hear about what other people think. When people stereotype, they are talking about her. Number 350 MS. HAGSTROM said she is not lazy, and she certainly does not need a carrot in front of her to get her off welfare. It is frustrating and demeaning to have to listen to people who think they know what is best. She asked HESS Committee members if they have ever been in a situation where they have less than one-quarter of a tank of gas, two weeks to go, no diapers, classes to attend and only $5.00 left. She said it is very hard. MS. HAGSTROM asked the HESS Committee members to think about what they are doing. Instead of only thinking about getting waivers and trying new experiments, she asked them to look at what is already in place and try to figure out why it is not working. She asked them to think about putting a skills building program into the jobs program. MS. HAGSTROM asked HESS Committee members to look at the numbers. If only 2,000 people are going to be served, she asked if it was worth bringing that kind of money in for a waiver for a program that may or may not work. She said that is ridiculous, especially considering that the state is saying that there is no money anywhere to build anything. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked what Ms. Hagstrom's degree was going to be in. MS. HAGSTROM answered that her degree will be in social work. Number 435 CO-CHAIR BUNDE observed that people who are not recipients of the program are probably as frustrated as Ms. Hagstrom. The job of the HESS Committee members, acting as "middle men," is to solve the needs of both parties. MS. HAGSTROM said that legislators are representative of everyone. That includes welfare recipients, as well as the disabled and everyone in their districts. Just because those on assistance do not have the money or the time to donate to campaigns, they are not represented properly. Poor people have poor clout. Ms. Hagstrom said she was not directly saying that any of the legislators present were guilty of this; this was a general, broad statement. CO-CHAIR BUNDE disagreed with her statement that poor people have little say in government. MS. HAGSTROM said legislators are representing everyone, and that includes the poor people. Number 474 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that is true, and he is representing over 10,000 people, and perhaps 2,000 of those contributed to his campaign. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said that the term "stereotype" should not be broadened any more than necessary. Number 490 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said HB 78 is deficient in dispelling the myths and the caricatures that people have in their minds. This bill does nothing more than to reinforce stereotypes at this point in time. It would be nice if the HESS Committee, when speaking of welfare and welfare reform, could begin dealing with people as human beings. Representative Brice wholeheartedly agreed with what Ms. Hagstrom was saying. The important thing is to dispel the myths and the labels. MS. HAGSTROM said it is not a crime to be poor, but it is made out as a crime. She said that a jobs program is in place. If people do not like how it works, time should be taken to study how it can be improved. It does not make sense for a select few to spend more money when half of that money could be used to double or triple the caseload on the jobs program so more people could be helped. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said the jobs program is part of the study on HB 78. Number 620 SHERRIE GOLL, Lobbyist, Alaska Women's Lobby and KIDPAC, pointed out that the Women's Lobby and KIDPAC have the same concerns that have been stated today about the ratable reductions. There are a number of bills that include ratable reductions, and Ms. Goll's organization will be opposing those reductions. However, her organization is in support of reforming the welfare program in ways that will encourage able people to work. MS. GOLL thinks that HB 78, insofar as it has already been through a process of deliberation, is very well thought out in some of the parts of the waivers. However, Ms. Goll agrees with the people who have testified previously. There is a section of the bill that deals with the earned income disregard, the car allowance, and the third part of the waiver package. It would be great if those programs could be applied as statewide as possible. MS. GOLL understands that the federal government currently requires demonstration projects to be done. However, Ms. Goll thinks that it is allowed for a program to be statewide if there are control groups. In the section of the bill that contains the three waivers, these waivers have been approved in many states already. It has been shown in these states that these can be incentives for people to work their way off welfare. Number 735 MS. GOLL thought when a proven track record is present on waivers that have worked in other places, Alaska should try to make those projects as statewide as possible. Control groups should then be set aside. MS. GOLL discussed the workfare portion of the bill. In the section concerning community service and uncompensated work, HB 78 does a pretty good job that can be improved upon. There are some more ideas floating around the meeting. Ms. Goll hopes that in the subcommittee, members can pick and choose among the ideas and combine them into something that will be the best if there is going to be a separate kind of program. Ms. Goll agrees that the job program should be studied to make sure it really is not working. MS. GOLL thinks the reason the jobs program really isn't working is because the caseload that has been mandated by the federal government is not funded at a level to take the people that are ready and want to work. The jobs program is having to turn those people away. Number 802 MS. GOLL thinks that if the door could be opened to some of those people, there would be a higher success rate. The Governor has proposals regarding broadening the definition of work for demonstration projects in rural areas where there is not employment. Ms. Goll thinks those are excellent ideas. This should be considered. MS. GOLL said in HB 78, every person in an eligibility unit who is over 18 would be required to participate in the work project. Things have been overlooked. What if a high school student is over 18 but under 19. That person should also be exempted. MS. GOLL hoped that the subcommittee will do as good a job as possible. She wanted to know when the subcommittee was going to meet. She thought the subcommittees should be at least open to the public even if public participation is not included. Number 875 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said the subcommittee meetings will be open to the public, and there will be working groups so testimony will not be taken. Observers will be welcome. Co-Chair Bunde and Co-Chair Toohey will be on the subcommittee, as will Representative Robinson, Representative Davis, and Representative Hanley. The rest of the HESS Committee members are invited to participate if they wish. The meeting date will be announced after schedules are studied.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|