Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/10/1993 02:20 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Senate Bill 101, introduced by the Senate Rules Committee by
request of the governor, was the only order of business to
come before the committee.
JAN HANSEN, Director, Division of Public Assistance,
Department of Health and Social Services, said SB 101
relates to eligibility and payments for public assistance.
The bill is part of the department's and the state's overall
package of doing some restructuring and reform of welfare.
The department is faced with the continuing escalating
welfare caseloads and limited numbers of state revenues.
She referred to information the committee had, "FY 94 Budget
Overview," and said it contains the background information
which provides the context for the bill. Pages 31 and 32
discusses the Division of Public Assistance's welfare reform
measures. Ms. Hansen said the benefit payment reductions
contained in the bill is one section of the overall plan.
She noted that there is also a study on self sufficiency
measures. She referred to the Jobs Program and said it is a
mechanism by which people are trained so that they can
secure a job that will pay a living wage for the entire
family. Ms. Hansen said another major aspect of the total
proposal by the department has to do with pushing the
federal government to make some changes in their laws and
policies which will enable us to structure welfare. Another
area is the push to increase child support collections as
that is a way income can be increased to families who are
currently depending on the state.
Ms. Hansen said SB 101 will reduce the amount of payments
that are made to people on the Aid to Families With
Dependent Children (AFDC) Program and Adult Public
Assistance (APA) Program. She referred to the limited
budget and said the department wants to continue to provide
payments and services to the full range of people. By
reducing a small amount of the benefits to each person, the
increased need will continue to be served.
Ms. Hansen referred to the AFDC Program and said there is a
suspension of the cost of living allowance (COLA).
Currently in the statute, on January 1st of every year, the
benefit amounts for AFDC recipients are raised by an amount
equal to the federal cost of living allowance which is
granted in the Social Security Program. This year it was
3.1 percent and it is estimated to be the same next year.
SB 101 suspends the COLA that would be granted on January 1,
1994.
The second major aspect of the bill is to impose a rateable
reduction of the AFDC Program. Ms. Hansen noted that the
rateable reduction is a federal term for when you are paying
a household less than the amount that has been determined
that they need. The AFDC Program is a federal program and
must be operated within federal guidelines. The federal
government provides that every state will set a standard of
need. So the state determines how much a poor family, who
qualifies for benefits, needs. The state then decides the
level at which they will pay those families. Ms. Hansen
said Alaska has perhaps always paid 100 percent of the need
standard. Most states pay a percentage of the needs
standard. The reduction in the bill would return the level
of AFDC payments to the level that was in effect in 1991.
The current AFDC payment for a family of three pays 77
percent of the poverty guideline for Alaska. The proposal
would reduce the amount that a three person family was paid
to 70 percent of poverty in Alaska. That reduction would
still place Alaska either as the top paid state or possibly
the second.
Ms. Hansen said in October, 1990, Alaska adopted an
unemployed parent component of the AFDC Program by federal
requirement. When the state did that, the standard that we
paid a unemployed parent family, which has two adults, was
different than the standard that we were paying to a AFDC
basic household with one adult. A slightly larger increment
was given for the second adult than they would have received
if that second person was a child. Ms. Hansen referred to
SB 101 and said the payment standard which would be paid to
a three person household (mother and two kids) would be the
same as what would be paid to a three person household
consisting of mother, father, and one kid. She said there
is about a $90 difference between what is being paid to a
one parent family and the two parent household of the same
size. The rateable reduction for a three person family is
$60 dollars. So a three person household would get just the
rateable reduction and would have a $60 dollar actual cash
difference from June, 1993, to July. A two parent family
would have a reduction of approximately $150 dollars because
there would be both the rateable reduction and the change to
create the equity for the two different household within the
AFDC Program. Ms. Hansen said there would be about $12.6
million savings to the AFDC Program by restructuring the
payments.
Number 186
Ms. Hansen referred to the Adult Public Assistance (APA)
Program and said the bill proposes a suspension of the COLA
and there is a rateable reduction. In the Adult Public
Assistance Program, the bill would roll the payments back to
the 1990 level. The program currently pays families at a
higher percentage of poverty than is paid in the AFDC
Program. Currently, a single adult on the APA Program would
receive 111 percent of poverty guideline. With the
reduction it would roll back to 104 percent of the poverty
guideline.
Another change relating to the APA Program is the
elimination of some retroactive coverage for adult public
assistance. When a disabled person makes application for
federal supplemental security income (SSI), the state pays
an interim assistance benefit while that application is
being processed by the federal government. She noted the
applications can take anywhere from four months to a year to
process. After they have qualified, the state supplements
the payment until they begin to receive it under the SSI
Program. For a single individual the payment would be $808
dollars. Ms. Hansen said the proposal in SB 101 is when a
person applies, and before the federal government determines
them eligible, the state pays them an interim assistance
benefit. When the federal government finds them eligible
and pays them a lump sum for all of those months while their
application was pending, the state would collect from that
lump sum what was paid out by the state for the interim
assistance amount. The remainder of that lump sum would go
to the client and their eligibility for public assistance
would continue from that date forward. She noted it is a
common agreement which other states have executed. Ms.
Hansen said the savings would account for approximately $5.1
million.
Ms. Hansen referred to section 2 of the bill and said there
is a typo where it references "AS 47.24.320(d)," it should
actually be "AS 47.25.320(d)."
Number 260
SENATOR DUNCAN asked what the total general fund reduction
would be. Ms. Hansen said the reduction in the AFDC Program
is $12.6 million of which half is federal and half are
general funds. She referred to the APA Program and said the
reduction is $5.1 million all of which is general funds.
Senator Duncan asked if the general fund reduction is about
$11 million. Ms. Hansen agreed.
Senator Duncan asked how many clients will be affected. Ms.
Hansen said the entire caseload of AFDC clients would be
effected. In FY 94 the caseload is projected to be at
13,858. Currently, FY 93 averages at 11,482. The COLA
reduction would apply to the entire case load. The rateable
reduction would apply to the entire caseload. The rateable
reduction alone, applies to the 11,482 AFDC basic households
- one parent AFDC families. The larger cut from both the
rateable reduction and to creating the equity between AFDC
basic and AFDC unemployed would apply to 2,376 unemployed
parent households.
Ms. Hansen noted there is a small change to the needs
standard for cases in which there are "adult not included"
cases. That is where the child is living with a non-needy
relative. The amount for one child is increased and the
amount is decreased for two children in a cost neutral
change. It brings the state into compliance with the
federal government. The projected case load for next year,
for adult public assistance, is 9,664.
Number 312
JOHN SHAFER, testifying from Sitka, was against SB 101. He
said he is concerned but not for himself as he has never
received public assistance. He said he is concerned about a
society that would not adequately fund people who could be
characterized as some of the most vulnerable people in the
society. He urged that the committee influence the
administration to restore the funds and to maintain some
support for people who need help.
NOVA BLAZEJ, of Bethel, testified against SB 101. She said
in the rural communities it is difficult for people to find
jobs. She said she feels that energy could be better
directed by not cutting funding, but by putting more of an
emphasis on locating and generating jobs. She thanked the
committee for listening to her.
CLARA KELLY, also testifying from Bethel, said being out in
the villages is like traveling to the third world. There
aren't any jobs whatsoever. There are a few for school
teachers, the store keeper, or city employees. There are
absolutely no jobs for young people. She said it is sinful
to think about cutting AFDC or any similar funding. Ms.
Kelly urged everyone to make positive plans.
PATRICK CUNNINGHAM was next to testify from Anchorage. He
said he is representing approximately 400 professional
social workers who are members of the Alaska Chapter of the
National Association of Social Workers. Mr. Cunningham
spoke against SB 101. The bill proposes to save the state
money, however the effort is ill conceived on the part of
the Hickel administration. It will result in more costs to
the state. The Division of Public Assistance is the anti-
poverty agent in charge of responding to the needs of the
poor. Yet their major proposal is to move poor citizens
deeper into poverty. Poverty is violence and SB 101 is a
deliberate attempt to inflict more violence upon Alaska's
poor. Mr. Cunningham said the claim that the bill will save
money is inaccurate. At the present time, only 930 of the
over 13,000 families on the AFDC case load are receiving
services from this program. He suggested that the Division
of Public Assistance follow the lead of many states that are
applying for waivers from federal requirements to establish
welfare self-sufficiency programs. It would maximize the
opportunity to substantially reduce case loads. Reducing
case loads is where the savings will be, not in lowering
benefits. Mr. Cunningham urged the committee not only to
reject SB 101, but to create legislation targeting the
elimination of poverty in the State of Alaska.
Number 414
MARIANNE KERR, testified from Anchorage. She said she is
representing Abused Women's Aid In Crises (AWAIC) which is a
battered women's shelter in Anchorage. Ms. Kerr urged that
the committee defeat SB 101 as it is an attempt to balance
the budget on the backs of those who can least afford it,
low income women and children. She explained that AWAIC
shelters are for women who have taken their children and
come to them because of a lethal home situation. Many women
return to their same dangerous home because of the economic
reality in Anchorage. Transportation is difficult and
expensive, there is a serious lack of affordable child care
and a lack of low cost and affordable state housing. She
said the reality is rents won't decrease on July 1st, they
will probably go higher. Ms. Kerr said everybody who is
concerned about their communities advocates budget reform,
however, the budget cuts need to be equitable. There are
ways to do that but not at the expense of those who can
least afford it.
Number 436
The next person to testify was KAREN PERDUE, from Fairbanks.
She said she has had the opportunity to work with some of
the committee members in the past as the Deputy Commissioner
of the Department of Health and Social Services. She said
she wants to speak against SB 101 as it proposes seven
statutory changes and is virtually everything the state can
legally do to reduce benefits. The impact on each of the
cuts has been well studied over time, but the combined
impact of the cuts, both on the economy and on the daily
lives of about 44,000 Alaskans that would be impacted, is
not known.
Ms. Perdue said if enacted, the cuts to AFDC will probably
be the largest cut enacted in this country in recent times.
Ms. Perdue said there is an impression that many states have
drastically cut AFDC benefits, but last year just six states
enacted reductions to AFDC benefits. No state has enacted a
cut as large as the one before the committee today. The
issue isn't really how big our benefit is versus other
states, it is the rate of reduction that the committee is
looking at. Ms. Perdue said she would send the committee
her testimony in writing.
Number 457
ROBIN WICKHAM, testifying from Fairbanks, was against SB
101. One concern is for the possible repercussions that
could result if dollars are cut from the APA and the AFDC
Programs. Far too many individuals and families are already
struggling on the current insufficient amount they are given
each month. Nationally, we are all going to be forced to
give more monthly income in the form of increased taxes. As
Alaskans, we know that we are going to bear the brunt of
this because of proposed increases in gasoline and fuel oil
prices. She said it is incomprehensible to reduce benefits
and strongly urged the committee not to do it.
CONSTANCE GRIFFITH, testifying from Ketchikan, spoke against
SB 101. She said she concurs with everything that has been
said against the bill. Ms. Griffith said people are reliant
on the income they presently receive. Their landlords
expect them to pay rent. They know just how much milk they
can buy for their children. They know exactly how much
money they have for clothing. When cuts are made, it not
only affects the families but also the people from whom the
families purchase what they require. Ms. Griffith said
there are many many tax breaks that wealthy people get and
nobody ever complains about those. She urged the committee
not to pass SB 101.
Number 495
ANN PENCE, testifying from Kenai, said she would like to
voice her opposition to SB 101. Often the case is women and
children are the first victims of budget cuts. She said she
understands the legislature's commitment to keeping state
spending within reason, but she believes an under nourished
child becomes a child who cannot learn. A child who cannot
learn becomes an unproductive member of society and will
probably end up needing assistance from a state or
government agency to meet basic financial needs. She said
she has heard the argument in favor of cutting assistance
benefits and the COLA increases to those benefits as the
lower 48 states don't provide a lower amount of assistance.
She has heard that Alaska attracts people because of its
generous public assistance programs. Ms. Griffith continued
to give testimony against SB 101 and urged that the bill not
be passed.
SENATOR ELLIS said according to the division's research,
people don't move to Alaska because they shop around and
compare benefits across the country. They move here because
of family members, because they used to live here, or
because they were told there were jobs here. He said there
are several different reasons why people move to Alaska.
The reasons given by supporters of the bill are the benefits
have to be cut is because every welfare case in the U.S.
will be attracted to Alaska. Also, a comment made often by
supporters of the bill is that poor people don't vote so
what do we have to worry about in terms of political
repercussions of cutting the budget with that group.
JAYNE ANDREEN, Executive Director, South Peninsula Women's
Services (SPWS) in Homer, testified against SB 101. She
said she is very concerned about the cuts. It is her
understanding that the poverty level is what has been
determined as being the bottom line for what is needed for a
family to cover its basic living needs. Our AFDC level is
at 77 percent of the poverty level so people are already
living below what is needed for their basic needs. It seems
like cuts go first to women and children and that is the
place that we can least afford to do it. She thanked the
committee for listening to her.
Number 544
ELLA CAREY-STARR, Southeast Alaska Regional Health
Corporation (SEARHC), testified against SB 101 from Haines.
She said it is very wrong to punish disabled people, women
and children by cutting their benefits. The legislature
needs to look at restructuring the entire public assistance
program to institute training, education, and community
service programs
to get people off of public assistance programs. She
thanked the committee for letting her testify.
CHERYL PHILLIPS, testifying from Haines, said she is in
opposition to SB 101. She indicated she is a single mother,
divorced, and isn't receiving child support. Ms. Phillips
said three years ago when her wages from crewing and
gillnetting ran out, it became apparent that filing for AFDC
was her only option. Since then, she has worked as a
waitress and cashier but never made a wage where she didn't
require some help. Ms. Phillips said since her layoff as a
cashier last fall, between unemployment and AFDC, she has
received $845 per month. She said she doesn't see how she
can get by with less. Ms. Phillips said she rents a room
for her and her son and shares kitchen and bath facilities
with two couples. Ms. Phillips urged the committee to find
other ways to save money as she can't afford the proposed
cuts.
Number 580
CONNIE SIPE, Executive Director, Older Alaskans Commission,
said old age assistance is, by state law, a part of adult
public assistance for the aged, blind, or disabled. The
bill would roll back the monthly benefit checks to poor
seniors and disabled adults by as much as $36 per month.
TAPE 93-22, SIDE B
Number 001
Ms. Sipe said the affect of the roll back to the 1990
assistance levels will also push about 325 poor seniors off
the assistance program altogether. Nearly 14 percent of all
Alaskans over age 65 are recipients. She noted that there
are 3,854 senior Alaskans who receive old age assistance.
Nearly 14 percent of all Alaskans over the age of 65 are
recipients of old age assistance. Many other adults in the
50 to 65 year age group are chronically disabled by
blindness and other health conditions and they rely on adult
public assistance as do other younger disabled people. Ms.
Sipe said there is a federal process for determining
permanent disability which is very onerous and over 40
percent of the people are disqualified and do not receive
that assistance. In addition to just the basic economic
necessities of life covered by an assistance check, many
seniors and all disabled adults who are under age 65 are not
covered by Medicare for their health care. Alaska has a
high proportion of seniors who never registered in the
social security system enough quarters to qualify for
Medicare coverage or social security payments. Ms. Sipe
continued to give testimony against SB 101 and urged the
legislature to rethink the bill and to delete all sections
reducing benefits to aged, blind and disabled adults.
ELLEN NORTHUP, Director, The Glory Hole, said she deals
daily with people who have little or no money and the
elderly and disabled. She said there are people who work in
places like Burger King who will work two weeks and come to
her for help in cashing their pay check. They cannot afford
a bank account because you are required to have a minimal
amount to open one. She said those people will have worked
two full weeks, eight hours a day, and take home about
$241.00. Ms. Northup continued to discuss hardships
encountered by those people. She said that her
organization doesn't receive money from the state or federal
government. They receive money strictly from churches,
individuals, and foundations. It costs $12 thousand per
month to run the Glory Hole. She discussed the high cost of
rents in the Juneau area and the long list of people who
have applied for Section 8 housing. Ms. Northup urged that
the committee vote against SB 101.
Number 058
GEORDIE CARROLL was next to testify. He indicated he has a
disability and feels that the proposed benefit cuts would be
ineffective because many people depend on the benefits. The
cuts would jeopardize people's lives by limiting the ability
for them to live. The COLA increase helps to give people
more money to spend on their survival and many people depend
on the benefits for surviving.
LINDA LINSON, Advocacy Services of Alaska, explained her
organization does advocacy for people with disabilities.
She said statistics do not show that people come to Alaska
to receive public assistance benefits. Ms. Linson discussed
a phone call she received from a person looking for some
kind of option for her son because her benefits are being
cut and she can't afford to keep her son at home anymore.
Current statistics show that 65 percent of families on AFDC
are on for two years or less. That is what welfare is for,
to help people who need a little bit of help transitioning
through hard financial times.
JOY DAVIS, Anchorage, was next to testify. She said she
works for Access Alaska but would speak on behalf of her own
situation. She said she experiences a disability, is
eligible for adult public assistance and AFDC as she has two
small infants and a foster daughter. The proposed cuts to
adult public assistance and AFDC is approximately one-tenth
of her budget. She said she is in the situation where she
does have a part-time job and can supplement her income
where a lot of people on public assistance programs are not
able to do that. She said the proposed budget cuts are not
appropriate.
Number 118
CHRISTINE PHILLIPS, testifying in Juneau, said she is an
AFDC recipient and receives $845 per month and $64 per month
in food stamps. She said she pays rent, utilities, medical
bills that Medicaid doesn't pay, transportation, food that
the $64 doesn't cover. She noted she has a 14 year old
daughter. Ms. Phillips said she can't take the cuts and
they aren't fair.
HUGH DOOGAN, testifying from Fairbanks, was against SB 101.
He said he doesn't feel that people's benefits should be
cut. Alaska has the assistance programs for very good
reasons. He said he is retired but is fortunate as he has
been able to work and support his family. Mr. Doogan said
there are some things that need to be done and one is that
if a woman and child end up on public assistance, whether
they are single or married, it is still an obligation of the
male to take care of his responsibility of bringing those
children into the world. He referred to child support
payments and said the courts should include COLA increases.
Ms. Doogan said he believes that when a women who is on
public assistance becomes pregnant, she should name the
father and go after him for the costs. If they can't get
any money from the father, it should be taken out of his
permanent fund checks.
SENATOR ELLIS referred to Mr. Doogan's comments regarding
some people being deeper in poverty because of the obligor
parent not paying child support and said there is a proposal
being pushed in the legislature for closing the Fairbanks
and the Juneau Child Support Enforcement Offices. That
would probably set back efforts in getting children what
they deserve under court orders.
Number 172
EVELYN NAVARRO, testifying in Juneau, said she receives $808
per month and $620 of that goes to rent. She said she eats
lunch at The Glory Hole. She said she is trying to get
ahead and it seems like she is going backwards. Ms. Navarro
said last year she was homeless and lived at The Glory Hole.
She has been in and out of the hospital and is currently
waiting for surgery to be done on her knee. Her daughter
lives with her, is attending adult education classes, and
receives $169 per month in food stamps. She discussed her
current living conditions and said she doesn't see how she
will survive with the cuts to the public assistance
programs.
VICKY BORREGO, Legislative Liaison, Catholic Community
Service (CCS), explained that Bishop Michael Kenny is
traveling but did want to share his concerns regarding SB
101. A major theme of CCS is a strong commitment to
advocate for public policies and programs which meet basic
human needs and promotes self sufficiency and independence.
Ms. Borrego said they feel SB 101 does not promote greater
self sufficiency, independence or empowerment. It reduces
an already extremely spartan monthly benefit even further.
She said instead of punishing the recipient of public
assistance benefits, including the elderly disabled adults
and dependent children, why not identify and quantify the
basic problems contributing to the need for public
assistance such as some of the recommendations that have
appeared in Governor Hickel's Organizational Efficiency Task
Force Report published in July, 1992. The report may be a
possible solution. She urged that SB 101 not be passed.
CHARLES WHEATON, of Juneau, said he is representing his
family. He read the following letter that was recently
published in the Juneau Empire:
To the House Finance Committee: Please think twice about
taking more money from my step kid's welfare. These AFDC
grants they are entitled to are already cut each month
because I am unemployed and the state welfare takes money
from my unemployment benefits.
Out of the $720 I receive each month, $200 gets taken out to
pay off an old AFDC debt. The $200 we never see is counted
each month as income on my wife's AFDC grant. So the
welfare takes dollar for dollar from her kids this month.
They, or we as a family of five, receive $130 in food
stamps, or about $32 a week to try to spend on food. And a
$170 check to pay $415 rent. My unemployment insurance is
$520.
I am fighting the state to pay child support. Yes, that's
right. I can't pay child support. The state takes it from
my kids. $426 is my support order that was entered on
default by the same judge who put me in jail for two years a
month earlier. I strongly believe in the child support
payments. The welfare is taking funds and food away from my
two new step-kids. What more do you guys want?
Welfare is to help people in need and give them a second
chance, something my new family isn't getting. So wake up,
you guys. You try to live off $35 a week with your families
and growing kids. We're a family of five people, taxpayers
also. We're a family of five people, taxpayers also. We
will remember you at election time.
Mr. Wheaton urged that SB 101 not be passed into law.
Number 253
DARRYL GUTHRIE, Human Services Department, Tlingit and Haida
Central Council, testified against SB 101. He said he runs
the General Assistance Program. The capacity of his
workload includes about twelve villages and communities. If
people don't qualify for AFDC, they probably qualify for
general assistance. In February, there were 189 cases out
of the twelve communities. There is already a loss of pride
and dignity and SB 101 is another slap in the face for the
people who are suffering the most. He said he is opposed to
SB 101 and urged the committee to vote against the bill.
SHERRY GOLL, representing Alaska Women's Lobby and KIDPAC,
spoke in opposition to SB 101. She said the cuts will hurt
23,000 children, 9,000 elderly and disabled, and 89 blind.
Ms. Goll said 350 elderly people will lose their benefits
completely and may or may not lose their eligibility for
Medicaid. There are also 31 children who fall into that
category. She gave committee members a draft document that
gives an idea of the distribution of the citizens in
Alaska's communities. Ms. Goll referred to the needs
standard and said we are meeting it today but will not be
meeting it any longer if the legislation is to pass. She
said sometimes she hears people talking about other
assistance programs, food stamps, housing assistance, etc.,
and said in the community of Juneau there is a three year
waiting list for public housing. Public housing is not
available to everyone on public assistance. Food stamps do
not begin to meet the needs of a family and can only be used
for basic food items. Ms. Goll said a bus pass costs $40
per month. If the goal is to reduce the need for public
assistance, we have to look at things such as increasing
child support enforcement, and the Jobs Program. She urged
the committee to try and reach a compromise on the bill and
not to accept all the cuts in one year. Ms. Goll continued
to testify against SB 101.
CINDY SMITH, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence, said her organization has opposed cuts to the AFDC
and APA Programs. They are opposed because of concerns
about immediate safety in terms of escaping from violent
relationships and because the cuts to marginally stable
people will put them on the street. She said when a
rateable reduction is made, women will be juggling their
bills and eventually won't be able to pay them. When they
can't pay them, they will be on the street. There are
particularly severe problems in Anchorage and Fairbanks with
rape and sexual assault of women who are homeless. The
shelters don't have any bed space left and they have been
over capacity for a year and a half. She urged increased
job training, child support enforcement and the reviewing of
non-needs based programs. Ms. Smith urged the committee to
not pass SB 101.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said the bill would be heard again at a
later date.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|