Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/06/1995 01:00 PM Senate 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. 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."
Representative Hanley was invited to join the Committee. He
stated that HB 78 was his version of the welfare reform
package. He briefly went through the bill. He stated that
the first section of the bill relates to child enforcement
division, giving them tools to allow for collecting more
child support enforcement. It actually reduces the amount
of money to be paid to AFDC since the extra child
obligations come in and supplant AFDC payments. He noted
that this may be imposed on Alaska, on a federal level,
since it is part of the contract with America; and is
involved in the package that the House sent to the U.S.
Senate. The next major section dealt with minors with
children. Requiring them to live at home with certain
exceptions. This section was originally in the governor's
bill and also in Senator Green's bill. He noted that he
incorporated this into his bill as it was passed out.
Basically, a minor who has a child, would have to live at
home with their parents, unless there was an abusive
situation or a few other exclusions included in the bill.
Senator Sharp MOVED to ADOPT SCSCSHB 78 (FIN), version "U".
No objections being heard, the working draft was ADOPTED.
Rep Hanley continued through the bill. He stated that
section 8 is a court rule change. In an attempt to equalize
the situation dealing with a minor mother required to live
at home with her parents, there is also a requirement for
the minor father which requires his parents to take monetary
responsibility.
Rep Hanley, in referring to Section 10, involves a report
that is required for the Child Support Enforcement Division,
requiring information dealing with occupational and driver's
licenses. Section 11 makes reference to the waivers in the
bill. Whereby the state is required to request waivers from
the federal laws to implement some of the demonstration
projects that are in the bill. Section 12 starts with the
waiver process. It also takes away some of the
disincentives to work and provides incentives. Currently,
under federal law a recipient of AFDC is allowed to keep
only $50 of their earnings after the first three months.
This bill changes that figure to $200, plus one-third of the
remaining amount, which provides an incentive for the
individual on AFDC. The state keeps two-thirds, which
actually helps to offset the amount of money that the state
is spending on the AFDC program. It also allows the
combined equity in a motor vehicle used by the family to be
raised from $1500 to $5000. There is a section dealing with
the waiver for two parent family, whereby the law provides a
100 hour limit per month. Section 13 concerns the workfare
issue. This section deals with exemptions but also says
that if a person is able- bodied, there is a requirement of
15 hrs a week of paid employment or 21 hrs of uncompensated
community service work, if assigned by the department. The
reason being there may not be any volunteer services.
Section 14 was originally in the governor's bill, it is an
AFDC unemployed parent project that sets up a 2 year self-
sufficiency development program. Section 15 is self-
employment project. It allows individuals on AFDC to save
money and not have that count against them, if they are
going to use it to establish a business. Section 16 is
called a diversion project. It allows the department the
flexibility to give individuals a one-time lump sum payment.
The dollar amounts are listed on page 28, lines 3-26. The
intent is to find those individuals and give them the one
time assistance. They would not be eligible for the AFDC
payments.
Co-chair Halford stated that the bill has received extensive
hearings in the Senate under a senate bill.
Senator Green was invited to join the committee. She began
on page 13, with the senate changes to the bill. The
section deals with ineligibility assistance, making it clear
that upon conviction of welfare fraud, the recipient is
ineligible for welfare benefits. She moved on to the
section dealing with benefits for children going on welfare,
page 14, line 6. She noted that it would not impact
medicare or food stamps, but cash benefits only. Another
change on page 14, line 18, notes that a person is not
eligible to receive benefits for more than a total of 60
months. There is a five year time limit unless the person
is permanently, totally, or physically disabled. There was
considerable discussion regarding the needs for the parent
in this situation. There was language developed to amend
this portion. A motion was made to adopt a conceptual
amendment on page 14, line 20. No objection being heard,
the conceptual amendment was ADOPTED into the work draft.
Senator Green advanced into section 4, stating the ratable
reduction of 1.7% is included in this version. In section
6, she noted the time limit on benefits were changed.
Section 12 deals with a two-tier system which she explained.
Section 14 which deals with the AFDC unemployed parent
project, provides for coordination within 2-years for self-
sufficiency. The last revision is in section 26, dealing
with the effective date.
Senator Zharoff asked what the process for teen mother would
be under this system? Rep Hanley responded that teen mother
would have to live at home with their parents, unless there
was an abusive situation or some of the other exceptions
provided in the bill. That was a proposal by the governor's
office and Senator Green, that he incorporated into the
original bill, which is still in the current version.
Senator Zharoff asked for clarity on the various time
limits. Ms. Babcock responded that there is a five year
time limit that applies to everyone including those on AFDC,
those not permanently totally, physically or mentally
disabled. Even if a recipient enters into a two year
program, the five year limit is still imposed. If a
recipient goes into a workfare, training, or jobs program
and put on the 24-month time limit, once a job is found,
after the 24-month, then the recipient has an 84 month
period whereby you are not eligible to go back on AFDC. If
the 84 month lapses and the recipient wants to go back on
AFDC, they would have three more years left on the 5 year
limitation. The time limits are not retroactive, it becomes
effective March 1, 1996 if not prohibited by federal law.
Senator Zharoff asked for an explanation on the ratable
reduction.
Ms. Babcock responded that the ratable reduction is 1.7%,
similar to the House bill, that came out of finance and went
to the floor. Page 15, lines 1-12 indicates the impact which
is $102 to $100; $452 to $451; $821 to $806 and $514 to
$505. The average is $15 month less with 1.7% ratable
reduction.
Senator Rieger asked for explanation on language on page 2.
Ms. Babcock responded that the language refers to non-
custodial grandparents, and their obligation to support the
grandchild, in the same way a parent would insofar as their
income is concerned.
This is in the case where both parents are minors and living
with the parents.
Senator Zharoff asked if money could be set aside from the
PFD and saved until the child was 18? Ms. Babcock stated it
could be done, but it is currently not being done. There
were questions at the table concerning encouragement of
people to move to Alaska because of the good benefits.
Co-chair Halford MOVED to change all time limits to March 1,
1996. No objection being heard, the conceptual amendment was
ADOPTED. Section 23 would indicate that only Section 21 is
immediate. No objection being heard, the conceptual
amendment was ADOPTED.
Senator Zharoff MOVED to adopt a letter of intent. The
motion failed. With this, he then asked to adopt the
original CSHB 78. A motion was made to rescind the "U" work
draft. The motion failed by a show of hands. All opposed:
Co-chair Halford, and Senators Rieger, Sharp, Phillips.
Those in favor: Senator Zharoff.
Senator Zharoff moved to adopt a conceptual amendment which
deleted those portions in section 3, and added to the CS.
After some discussion, he amended his motion to include the
deletion of all of Section 3. By a show of hands the
amendment FAILED. Senator Zharoff was in favor, and Co-
chair Halford, along with Senators Sharp, and Rieger were
opposed. Senator Phillips abstained. The motion failed 3
to 1.
Senator Zharoff moved to remove the ratable reduction of
1.7%. By a show of hands, the amendment FAILED. In favor
was Senator Zharoff. Opposed were Co-chair Halford, along
with Senators Rieger, Sharp and Phillips. The motion failed
4 to 1.
Senator Zharoff moved for the removal of the Time Limits on
Benefits under Section 6, starting on page 16, line 31. By
a show of hands, the amendment FAILED. In favor was
Senator Zharoff. Opposed were Co-chair Halford, along with
Senators Rieger, Sharp and Phillips. The motion failed 4 to
1.
Senator Zharoff moved for the removal of portions of Section
12. By a show of hands, the amendment FAILED. In favor was
Senator Zharoff. Opposed were Co-chairs Halford and Frank,
along with Senators Sharp, Rieger and Phillips. The motion
failed 5 to 1.
Senator Zharoff moved to delete subsection (e) and (f) on
page 23 of section 13. By a show of hands, the amendment
FAILED. In favor was Senator Zharoff. Opposed were Co-
chairs Halford and Frank, along with Senators Sharp, and
Rieger. The motion failed 4 to 1.
Senator Zharoff moved to change years in Section 14, page
24, line 4. Changing 2 years to three years and 24 months to
36 months. By a show of hands, the amendment FAILED. In
favor was Senator Zharoff. Opposed were Co-chairs Halford
and Frank, along with Senators Phillips, Sharp and Rieger.
The motion failed 5 to 1.
Sherri Gore, representing the Alaska Women's Lobby testified
in support of the House version of the bill. She stated
that the committee has adopted a new approach which
encourages abortions and limits those who are caring for
totally disabled children. She asked to exempt parents of
the totally disabled.
Senator Phillips expressed concern about the parent caring
for the totally disabled and indicated that additional
language was needed to amend this area. Senator Phillips
MOVED to adopt new language on page 14. No objections being
heard, an amendment to an earlier amendment was ADOPTED.
Senator Sharp MOVED to adopt SCSCSHB 78 (FIN) with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes
as listed. No objection being heard SCSCSHB 78 (FIN) was
REPORTED OUT of committee with a "do pass" from Co-Chair
Halford and Senator Sharp. Senators Rieger and Phillips
signed "no recommendations" and Senator Zharoff signed "do
not pass". The accompanying fiscal notes are noted below:
No Dept Date Amount
2 DH&SS (PA-Elg. Deter.) 5/7/95 170.4
3 DH&SS (PA-Admin) 5/7/95 283.0
4 DH&SS (PA-Data Proc.) 5/7/95 972.4
5 DH&SS (Ak. Work Prog.) 5/7/95 - 0 -
394.5
FY-97
6 DH&SS (Child Care) 5/7/95 - 0 -
152.0
FY-97
7 DH&SS (AFDC-Ratable Red.)5/7/95 (1,610.7)
8 DH&SS (PFD Hold Harm.) 5/7/95 (226.9)
9 DH&SS (FYS Central) 4/4/95 113.9
10 DH&SS (Med. Asst. Claims)5/7/95 40.0
17 DH&SS (EMS Training) 3/10/95 1.5
23 DEC (Palmer Lab.) 2/17/95 -0-
24 DH&SS (Med. Facilities) 5/7/95 (116.7)
25 DH&SS (Med. Non-Fac.) 5/7/95 (107.7)
26 DH&SS (AFDC) 5/7/95 (317.9)
27 DOLabor (Mech. Insp.) 3/30/95 & 5/2 53.7
28 DOLabor (Safety & Health)3/30/95 & 5/2 36.1
29 DC&ED (Banking/Corps.) 3/24/95 & 5/1 29.1
30 DC&ED (Occ. Licensing) 3/24/95 & 5/1 83.5
31 DC&ED (Ins. Operations) 3/24/95 & 5/1 26.0
32 DOR (Child Support) 4/4/95 & 5/2 519.4
33 DOE (Teacher Cert.) 3/24/95 & 5/1 20.8
34 DPS (Driver Services) 4/3/95 & 5/1 222.8
35 DOLabor (Wage & Hr. Admin) 5/2/95 -0-
36 Courts 5/5/95 80.8
NEW DH&SS (Hearings/Appeals) 5/7/95 -0-
65.6
FY-97
The meeting RECESSED at 2:00 p.m.
End Tape #66, Side 1
Begin Tape #68, Side 1
The meeting RECONVENED at 3:45 p.m. Present were Co-chair
Halford, along with Senators Phillips, Rieger, and Sharp.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|