Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/14/1998 04:05 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 14, 1998
4:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Con Bunde, Chairman
Representative Joe Green, Vice Chairman
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative J. Allen Kemplen
Representative Al Vezey
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Tom Brice
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 201
"An Act transferring responsibility for the day care assistance
program and the child care grant program from the Department of
Community and Regional Affairs to the Department of Health and
Social Services; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 429
"An Act relating to vocational education."
- HEARD AND HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 17
"An Act creating the crime of criminal transmission of human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV)."
- PASSED SB 17 OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 201
SHORT TITLE: DAY CARE TO DHSSC
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) HANLEY
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
3/18/97 737 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
3/18/97 737 (H) HES, FINANCE
4/14/98 (H) HES AT 4:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 429
SHORT TITLE: REQUIRING VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) AUSTERMAN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/18/98 2353 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
2/18/98 2353 (H) HES
3/19/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
3/19/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
4/09/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
4/09/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
4/14/98 (H) HES AT 4:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: SB 17
SHORT TITLE: CRIMINAL TRANSMISSION OF HIV
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) TAYLOR, Pearce, Miller, Ward;
REPRESENTATIVE(S) Rokeberg
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/13/97 18 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/97
1/13/97 18 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
1/13/97 18 (S) HES, JUD, FIN
4/11/97 (S) HES AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH ROOM 205
4/11/97 (S) MINUTE(HES)
4/11/97 1099 (S) HES RPT 2DP 1NR
4/11/97 1099 (S) DP: LEMAN, WARD; NR: WILKEN
4/11/97 1099 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES (ADM, DPS, LAW)
4/11/97 1099 (S) JUD REFERRAL WAIVED
4/15/97 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
4/22/97 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
4/22/97 1383 (S) FIN RPT 1DP 4NR 1DNP
4/22/97 1383 (S) DP: TORGERSON; DNP: ADAMS
4/22/97 1383 (S) NR: PEARCE, SHARP, PHILLIPS, DONLEY
4/22/97 1383 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (ADM, DPS, LAW)
4/25/97 (S) RLS AT 10:45 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203
4/25/97 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
4/25/97 1478 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/25/97
4/25/97 1485 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
4/25/97 1485 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
4/25/97 1485 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 17
4/25/97 1485 (S) MTN TO REMOVE (ADM, LAW)FN ANALYSES
NOT
4/25/97 1485 (S) ADDRESSING FISCAL IMPLICATION ADP Y14
N6
4/25/97 1485 (S) COSPONSOR(S): MILLER, WARD
4/25/97 1486 (S) PASSED Y14 N6
4/25/97 1486 (S) DUNCAN NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
4/28/97 1513 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING
4/28/97 1513 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y14 N5 E1
4/28/97 1530 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
4/30/97 1393 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
4/30/97 1393 (H) HES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE
3/12/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
3/12/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
4/07/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
4/07/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
4/14/98 (H) HES AT 4:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE MARK HANLEY
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 507
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-4939
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 201.
LAMAR COTTON, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Community and Regional Affairs
P.O. Box 112100
Juneau, Alaska 99811-2100
Telephone: (907) 465-4700
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 201.
YVONNE CHASE, Director
Division of Community and Rural Development
Department of Community and Regional Affairs
333 West 4th Avenue, Suite 220
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2341
Telephone: (907) 269-4610
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 201.
JEWEL JONES
Municipality of Anchorage
P.O. Box 196650
Anchorage, Alaska 99519
Telephone: (907) 343-4667
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 201.
JEAN STRAATMEYER, Administrator
Child Care Assistance
HC01, Box 6446
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 373-1456
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 201.
JIM NORDLUND, Director
Division of Public Assistance
Department of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 110640
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0640
Telephone: (907) 465-2680
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 201.
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 434
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-2487
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 429.
MEL KROGSENG, Legislative Assistant
to Senator Robin Taylor
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 30
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-3873
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 17.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-46, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN CON BUNDE called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. Members
present at the call to order were Representatives Bunde, Green,
Porter, Dyson and Kemplen. Representative Vezey arrived while the
meeting was in progress. Representative Brice was absent. The
meeting was teleconferenced for listen-only.
HB 201 - DAY CARE TO DHSSC
Number 0059
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the first order of business to come before
the committee was HB 201, "An Act transferring responsibility for
the day care assistance program and the child care grant program
from the Department of Community and Regional Affairs to the
Department of Health and Social Services; and providing for an
effective date." He asked Representative Hanley to come before the
committee to present his bill.
Number 0084
REPRESENTATIVE MARK HANLEY, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
HB 201, said during the course of his work over the last few years
on welfare form, it was repeated to him time and time again how
important child care is both to the people trying to get off the
welfare program because obviously it makes it pretty difficult if
a person doesn't have the ability to pay for child care when
looking for a job, as well as the fact that a lot of people manage
to stay off welfare because they have access to child care. He
said it's been an integral part of the whole welfare reform issue
and although many people who receive child care are not on welfare,
some of them are right on that edge. He said last year during the
budget process as the Finance Committee was trying to figure out
welfare payments for child care, he asked the Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS) how many people on welfare right now
access child care through the Community and Regional Affairs Day
Care Assistance Program, which is the non-welfare child care
program. The department didn't have an immediate answer and in
fact, it took him some time to get the information which revealed
that thousands of people on welfare were accessing child care
through the Department of Community and Regional Affairs. The
Department of Health and Social Services had actually overestimated
the cost needed to fund child care for welfare recipients because
they estimated that everyone on the welfare rolls would need child
care when in fact, the recipients were already accessing it. This
brought to light that part of the problem was a lack of
coordination between the two departments and a lack of
understanding of how the system works. As a result, he introduced
HB 201 which very simply moves the Department of Community and
Regional Affairs' (DCRA) statutes on child care into the Department
of Health and Social Services. He anticipates some administrative
savings and there should be a clearer line as to who is the head
person for the child care program. He noted the effective date
reads July 1, 1997, which obviously would need to be changed. One
of the concerns that had been expressed with the program being
moved to the Department of Health and Social Services was that
people didn't want to be perceived as getting welfare. He said, "I
don't think they're going to see any difference - if we moved it to
Public Safety - it doesn't make sense necessarily to move it there
- in Health and Services there are a lot of federal funds that have
to go through DHSS and what's happening now through our Welfare to
Work Program, you're seeing this mix - some is directly
administered through Health and Social Services and a lot is
getting funded through Health and Social Services in this year's
budget RSAed (Reimbursable Services Agreement) or sent over to
Community and Regional Affairs to administer as well, so there's a
combination of departments dealing with both - DCRA is now, at
least under the Governor's budget proposal dealing with both the
welfare individuals who are trying to get jobs and get off the
welfare rolls as well as the people who aren't on welfare." He
said that's the reason he introduced this bill and it's fairly
simple in its concept.
Number 0465
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN remarked this appears to be a sensible
approach. With a program shift from DCRA to DHSS he wondered if
Representative Hanley anticipated a reduction in the number of
people accessing child care because of not wanting to be perceived
as getting welfare or if a reduction would come as a result of some
people being on the program who don't actually qualify for it.
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY remarked people have to qualify under either
program. He said he wasn't talking about trying to eliminate any
coverage for individuals being served, but rather eliminate some of
the administration costs of two separate programs.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN questioned the absence of a fiscal note
showing a positive impact.
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY replied he has not seen a fiscal note from
the department; in actuality, he's still waiting to hear what the
department thinks about the overall program.
Number 0564
CHAIRMAN BUNDE wondered how individuals currently in the program
administered by the DCRA would know the difference when they
receive a check next month from the DHSS.
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said he didn't think recipients would see any
difference; at least that's the intent. He explained the DCRA not
only administers grants to individuals, but the grants to providers
as well, and provides a licensing function for providers to make
sure they're up to certain standards. That entire function would
be shifted along with most of the people involved, so he didn't
think there would be a noticeable difference.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked about the welfare stigma.
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said those comments had been made last year
and it may not be a concern any longer.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said Representative Hanley had indicated that many
of these people may well be on welfare if they didn't have access
to child care.
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said the testimony on the welfare reform
legislation was really focused on how critical child care is for
individuals on welfare and individuals off welfare.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said he had heard the same comments when he was
teaching. He asked if there were additional questions for
Representative Hanley.
Number 0691
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER verified for the record this bill would
not present any significant change to the criteria for
qualification.
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said that is not the intent of the
legislation; it's to transfer the programs under one roof and
hopefully, to realize some administrative savings. The intent is
not to either change, eliminate or add to the number of people who
would qualify under either program.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Representative Hanley for his remarks and
asked Lamar Cotton to come before the committee to present his
testimony.
Number 0765
LAMAR COTTON, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Community and
Regional Affairs, advised that Yvonne Chase, the director of this
program, was available to testify via teleconference. He testified
the department does not support HB 201; the program has been in the
DCRA for 23 years and as with any program, there have certainly
been challenges but generally have come up with a solution. He
noted many programs are cross-agency, requiring coordination and
conceded there is undoubtedly a need for improvement in that area.
However, it is the department's thinking that moving programs and
people probably won't resolve some of the basic questions.
Secondly, it is the department's sense from the client perspective
there isn't a compelling need to make a change. Clients are
comfortable with the department and for whatever reason, there's a
sense of getting better service from a smaller department. In
conclusion, the department does not concur with the observation
that changes are needed.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Cotton for his comments and asked Yvonne
Chase to testify at this time.
Number 0898
YVONNE CHASE, Director, Division of Community and Rural
Development, Department of Community and Regional Affairs,
testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She said
Representative Hanley, in introducing the bill, spoke about the
importance of child care and also the lack of coordination he had
sensed in the past in terms of administering a program between two
agencies. She said there is a great difference between the two
programs and the funding streams and the two departments have
worked hard since the beginning of welfare reform to separate those
issues for the departments as well as the clients. The Department
of Health and Social Services provides the funding, as far as
welfare reform efforts, to the Department of Community and Regional
Affairs for both the pass two and pass three programs, which is the
funding for individuals who are moving from welfare to work. The
DHSS at this point is only authorizing child care pass one clients,
or those clients who are still receiving public assistance. She
said in terms of a duplicative structure, with the exception of
pass one, all of the child care authorizations and payments are
done through the DCRA system. The DCRA continues to handle all the
ongoing aspects of the overall program; i.e., regulations,
monitoring, technical assistance, distance delivery program,
financial reports, et cetera, and (indisc.) that effort, there
again to concentrate on making sure recipients of public
assistance, as they move from welfare to work, have the funding
available and the immediate access to child care, have been doing
the first authorizations and helping the client transition to a
system that's been in place for 20 years.
MS. CHASE referred to an audit conducted by Legislative Budget and
Audit in November 1994 on this issue, and said there were at that
point, some perceptions that perhaps a combining of these
administrative functions would suggest some efficiencies. The
audit, however, concluded that due to the way the child care
service delivery system is structured, the programs would be better
remaining separate. In fact, the department over the last couple
years has attempted to clarify the difference between the programs
and the funding streams.
MS. CHASE said that in terms of receiving information - how many
people are in the system, where are they, how much are they
receiving in terms of a subsidy - she would have to agree that
statistical information in the past has not been readily
accessible. It's been a problem throughout the system mainly
because of a "count on your fingers" system for the most part. The
department is in the process of implementing a new management
information system that will be used by the DCRA and all local
administrators throughout the state, and will comply with the new
federal requirement for statistical reporting on child care. It
will both provide information to the state legislature hopefully,
at a moments notice as well as meet the requirements that both the
DCRA and the DHSS have in terms their funding streams.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Chase for her remarks.
Number 1127
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said it appeared to him the DCRA could argue
that because of being largely active in the rural areas - probably
more active than any other department, it makes most sense for the
DCRA to administer child care in the rural areas. He asked Mr.
Cotton if that was a valid argument?
MR. COTTON said his quick answer was absolutely, but he tended to
agree with the sponsor that probably anyone could administer the
program. However, if it came to a tie vote, he believed the DCRA's
presence and field staff probably gives them the edge. He added
that others can do child care, but the point is who can do it best
and who do the clients feel most comfortable with? There's
undoubtedly been, administratively and from the legislative branch,
confusion, misunderstanding and a learning process about welfare
reform and the DCRA is not without exception of trying to work
through it. He stated his belief that DCRA has come a long way in
the last couple years and in the department's opinion, the solution
to the lack of information at times or the inability to succinctly
answer questions is not a reason to combine the programs.
Number 1240
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if the DCRA and DHSS use the same
standards for licensing child care?
MS. CHASE said the licensing requirements are the same throughout
the state. She added, "Health and Social Services does some of the
licensing and within the municipality of Anchorage, the
municipality itself handles (indisc.-coughing)."
Number 1270
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "We heard earlier that the recipients of
this would very likely not even be aware that there had been a
change and I've got kind of a three-part or run-together kind of
question that most of us are aware the economy of scale, generally
with more people you can operate even if it's only the
administrative load that changes, a little more efficiently and I
was wondering - there was reference to a study that reviewed this
very thing or something similar to this on a combination - what was
the date of that, was that something recent or was that some time
back?"
MR. COTTON replied it was 1994.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked, "Would you think that with this reform
that that conclusion would be the same if it were reviewed again in
1998?"
MS. CHASE stated her belief the conclusion would be the same and
added the infrastructure that the Legislative Budget and Audit
Report talked about in 1994 is in fact the same infrastructure that
has been in place for a number of years, so the DHSS has not
duplicated the infrastructure.
Number 1352
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said somehow it seems logical to consolidate to
achieve some administrative savings and asked if all child care
should be moved to the DCRA.
MS. CHASE replied that's certainly possible, but she reiterated the
DHSS at this point has the funding stream for those individuals
moving from welfare to work and has not attempted in any way to
duplicate a program, and in fact, has one position within their
central office dedicated to coordination with the DCRA but has not
formed an administrative structure beyond that.
Number 1380
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN observed, "Is it possible that I've heard a
couple of times now between the last two testifiers that there is
a 'touchy/feely' almost that has been there for some time that
would be lost if they were combined into one program and I'm
wondering if do we still have the wherewithal to consider
continuing a 'touchy/feely' program as opposed to an answering of
needs that maybe we could just no longer afford to have separate
organizations, one of which is kind of a nice, soft pillow as
opposed to another being kind of a rigid chair, but in both cases
you support the individual. And I'm wondering maybe if that's the
aspect we're worried about here?"
MS. CHASE commented it may be more appropriate for Jewel Jones who
oversees the program for the municipality of Anchorage to respond
to that question.
Number 1440
JEWEL JONES, Municipality of Anchorage, testified via
teleconference from Anchorage, said, "I am here today representing
those parents and advocating on behalf of those parents because
they are working or training and that's the point of what we are
doing with day care assistance and working with both Departments of
Community and Regional Affairs and Health and Social Services in
order to provide child care for these parents. It's really not -
I wouldn't want to call this 'touchy/feely' but there is something
to be said about the whole concept of day care assistance, as you
might recall is a state program. It was designed initially to help
parents move from not necessarily welfare, but they had to be in
training or working, and we were providing a subsidy for them in
order to be able to continue to work. But really these are local
programs and I think that's the point that needs to be made - that
the client knows the city of Fairbanks, they know the city of
Kenai, they know the Mat-Su Borough and they certainly do know the
municipality of Anchorage and often call on you when there is a
problem. So when we're talking about the funding agencies and the
relationship with the state agencies, really we're talking about a
funding stream, a funding mechanism, so it doesn't make a lot of
difference in that degree. I think it makes a lot of difference
because the DCRA today has a system. If you make that kind of a
transfer, then what you're obligating the DHSS to do is to set up
a system. They are successful at this point in working with in the
first level of child care, pass one, where they are working with
those parents, but most all of the child care system today is in
DCRA, be that pass two, pass three in child care systems. We also
have those opportunities at the local level to coordinate with
those people going into job training - that happens at the local
level, also. So, it is at the local level that you see these
issues and I don't think that the administrative issues that you're
talking about are going to really result in a great deal of
savings, but there would be a major disruption to a system that is
currently in place."
Number 1570
REPRESENTATIVE J. ALLEN KEMPLEN asked Ms. Chase to elaborate on the
conclusion of Legislative Budget and Audit that the program and the
funding stream should be kept separate.
MS. CHASE quoted from the audit, "The similarity of these
administrative functions suggested that some efficiencies might be
realized through a merger or consolidation of the program.
However, in our view due to the way the child care service delivery
systems are necessarily structured, the programs should remain
separate." She added, "When I looked into what was discussed
within the audit in terms of the structure of the program, they
were talking about the way in which - now mind you this was done in
1994, so they were talking about the JOBS program in the DHSS as
opposed to what's now called the welfare to work program and the
ATAP program - but was looking at the service delivery system that
was in place for all of child care within the DCRA and then looking
at the piece that had specifically come on to deal with the issue
of welfare to work."
Number 1640
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked if Ms. Chase was referring to
personnel when speaking of the infrastructure.
MS. CHASE said no, she was actually speaking of the actual service
delivery system that had been constructed and remained through the
years in terms of a very small unit at the state level and then a
network of local administrators located throughout the state who
actually provide the authorization and the payment structure.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE noted that Jean Straatmeyer was standing by to
testify from Mat-Su.
Number 1680
JEAN STRAATMEYER, Administrator, Child Care Assistance, Matanuska-Susitna Borou
the borough's program has increased immeasurably over the six years
that she's been the administrator. The agency has a good
reputation in the area and people know where to come to get child
care assistance. The agency has a good working relationship with
the Work Services Office that handles the pass one portion of child
care. She said many people have commented how glad they are to be
able to receive the child care assistance instead of having to go
on public assistance. She said there is a certain feeling among
the people who are working but don't have quite enough money to be
able to pay for child care of not wanting to go to the public
assistance office to get child care assistance; they want to come
to an office where they feel a little more self-confident. She
doesn't think it would be a good idea to change the child care
assistance program from the DCRA to the DHSS because the
individuals in the field working with the public have known the
program for years and years.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Straatmeyer for her comments and asked
Jim Nordlund to come forward to testify.
Number 1795
JIM NORDLUND, Director, Division of Public Assistance, Department
of Health and Social Services, testified in opposition to HB 201.
He said the division recognizes that Representative Hanley brought
this bill forward with the intention of trying to figure out a way
of providing an even better child care system to the state. He
said the department appreciates that and appreciates the fact there
are no cuts to subsidies that are so very important to helping both
people who are on public assistance going to work and to maintain
people who are in jobs. He said, "I guess the main reason we would
be opposed to the bill - I guess we'd take issue even with the fact
that we run a child care program - we do not run a child care
program, DCRA runs the child care program and we just access those
child care funds through our eligibility technicians who authorize
child care services for folks who are on public assistance. One of
the things we can emphasize in terms of the fact that we don't run
a program is out of a department of close to 2,000 employees, we
have 1 person who works in child care and that person incidentally
is Carla Timpone and used to be Sherri Goll. We don't have a large
administrative structure to run our side of the child care
administration. The system really works well right now. There
needs to be two points of entry into child care really, no matter
what system you create. There needs to be a point of entry for the
person who is on welfare who is trying to get that first job and
needs child care to get offered that job, and then there also needs
to be a point of entry for people who are currently working and as
Ms. Straatmeyer said, who may not necessarily want to go into the
welfare office to get their child care; they want to go into
another entity that can provide that child care for them without
having to necessarily go into our offices. I think no matter how
we conceive of a system, there's still going to need to be those
two individual points of entry and that really is the system we
have right now and we think the system is actually fairly
efficiently administered."
MR. NORDLUND said there probably will be no administrative savings
realized in combining the functions into the DHSS and the division
has found that clients prefer the system the way it is currently
operating. He stated frankly, with the implementation of the
welfare reform, the division has their hands full in trying to get
up to speed in the development and administration of a new welfare
system, much less taking on the responsibility of administering a
child care program as well, that includes a bunch of additional
clients not currently being served by the Division of Public
Assistance. In conclusion, with all that plus the findings of the
audits previously discussed, the division does not support this
legislation but certainly wants to work with Representative Hanley
or any other member of the legislature, to continue seeking ways to
improve the child care system.
Number 1930
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if Mr. Nordlund didn't view the
division's role increasing in child care administration given the
new challenges of the welfare to work program and the welfare
reform.
MR. NORDLUND said yes, the amount of staff time authorizing child
care benefits has increased and, in fact, the division has
requested additional funding for child care subsidies. That side
of the business has grown quite dramatically, which actually
pleases the division because every time there's an additional
subsidy for child care benefits, it means another person employed
or in some sort of work activity that will lead them to self-sufficiency.
Number 1966
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER remarked while he is somewhat sensitive to
the fact that some folks don't want to be on public assistance, it
seemed to him the program and the funds should be in one place.
Inasmuch as it appears the DHSS has inherited the program, ever
expanding, he wondered if the function could be RSAed and
implemented the same way it is currently, but this bill would be in
effect and it would be a DHSS program.
MR. NORDLUND explained currently the DCRA is basically the child
care agency of the state; that department is responsible for making
sure the quality of the child care is as good as it can be, making
sure there's enough child care capacity, as well as administering
child care for people who are not on public assistance. The DHSS
simply accesses the system for people who happen to be on welfare
at the time. He said the funding stream is almost irrelevant as
long as the funding gets to the right place for the service
delivery.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Representative Hanley for his closing comments
on HB 201.
Number 2044
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY said, "I made a couple of notes - again,
you'll see some concerns I guess by the people in the department.
I was just going to note that one of the reasons is that we have
field staff that can deal with a lot of this stuff in the DCRA and
I would suggest that, generally speaking, there's a lot more Health
and Social Services people around this state than there are
Community and Regional Affairs people. Yvonne said that Health and
Social Services does some licensing and some is done in DCRA; I
think there's a duplication there, as well. In the welfare thing
and what brought this to mind for me, is that we are going to and
I think rightfully so, one-stop shops, not just for welfare
training, but we're trying to create state agencies around the
state where people can come in and get job training, where they can
get not just access to our current welfare system, but maybe energy
assistance programs because it used to be people would have to come
in - if you're at the income level where you qualify for some of
these programs, whether it's child care or maybe you qualify for
welfare benefits, maybe you qualify for food stamps, maybe you
qualify for Medicaid, and maybe you qualify for energy subsidies
through some of the programs that we have for housing - you know
for your electricity and some for housing allowances - you know,
some folks would have to go to five or six different places to be
able to qualify. And guess what? They go through the same
paperwork every time looking for income levels, where do you work,
- a lot of the same kinds of questions, and I think it's been good
that over time we've tried to combine a lot of these things.
Ketchikan has a program where they've tried to combine a lot of
that including the job training aspects and it just seems to me
that aside - and I heard the comment here that people don't want to
come into a welfare office or they're concerned about going in --
and I think we ought to combine public health in some of these
areas too, so that when you go into an office, people don't know
whether you're going in there for welfare or public health service
or for child care services, whether you're on welfare or not."
REPRESENTATIVE HANLEY continued, "Jim talked about two points of
entries - one being the welfare offices and he was the one that
mentioned that people are a little concerned about going to the
welfare office because those are the people who are on welfare
versus the people that aren't on welfare wanting to have a
different point of entry. We're talking about different offices.
I'm not talking about -- there's two different people here that
have qualified for a government program and I think a lot of our
things ought to be combined even more than just these two programs,
but there's incredible similarities here, I think there is
duplication in some aspects of effort, and I haven't seen -- if you
go back through the audit, some of the things they pointed to were
'the JOBS program' and Jim rightfully pointed out that maybe they
-- I think as he said, they access child care funds, they don't
actually provide a program and it's through their eligibility techs
that do this and more and more we've asked those eligibility techs
to do more - to be a little more of the front line worker to
explain to people what their options are so you don't just go in
and say, 'Okay, here you can get your' - it used to be AFDC
payment, now it's Alaska Temporary Assistance Program, 'your cash
grant', now they're supposed to say, 'And here's guess what else,
you might be eligible for this and here's the limits on your time
and you can get child care and things like that' and it seems to me
that cross training some of these people instead of having one
person that's just a child care tech that says, 'Okay, here's what
you get for child care.' People get into habits, but I've got to
tell you there's a lot of folks out there when they're trying to
access government programs, they don't know where to go and they
get as frustrated as anybody at having to go to four different
offices ...."
Number 2216
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced that HB 201 would be held in committee for
another hearing.
HB 429 - REQUIRING VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
Number 2234
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the next bill to come before the committee
was HB 429, "An Act relating to vocational education." The
committee had heard this bill before and would not be taking public
testimony at this hearing. He referred to a letter he received
from the Anchorage School District expressing concern with delayed
graduation and asked Representative Austerman if he had any
thoughts to share on that issue.
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN said he had just read the letter and
he hadn't introduced this legislation to do battle with the
Anchorage School District. This bill has only one committee
referral - the HESS Committee - and if committee members have a
problem with the way the bill is drafted in terms of how the other
school districts around the state are doing business, he would
prefer the bill be held in committee until it can be resolved
rather than moving it on.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE pointed out this bill will go on to the Finance
Committee because there is an indeterminate fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN said he would prefer the bill be held in
committee until such time as he has an opportunity to work with the
Anchorage School District.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if in the rework of the bill there would
be some way to maintain the concept but have an exemption for
individuals who are obviously headed for college, so they don't get
held back.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN agreed with Representative Green and based
on the letter from the Anchorage School District, it appears they
have set up a college plan and those students not wanting that have
the option for vocational education. He noted there's sort of a
conflict in the letter and the original information he had received
from the Anchorage School District.
TAPE 98-46, SIDE B
Number 0002
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said he didn't want to see the Anchorage School
District producing educated idiots in that they are very bright
when it comes to calculus, but can't get out of the rain when it
comes to doing some of the practical things.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN said the letter from the Anchorage School
District indicates this would only affect 30 percent of their
students; it's the other 70 percent that he's concerned with.
Number 0044
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER recalled the committee had previously
indicated a need to define "vocational education."
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN said there is a definition in the
regulations.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE noted that HB 429 would be held in committee at the
request of the sponsor.
SB 17 - CRIMINAL TRANSMISSION OF HIV
Number 0130
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the next bill to come before the committee
was SB 17, "An Act creating the crime of criminal transmission of
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)." He asked Senator Taylor's
legislative assistant to address SB 17.
Number 0130
MEL KROGSENG, Legislative Assistant to Senator Robin Taylor, Alaska
State Legislature, said this bill does not criminalize the disease
of HIV or AIDS; it criminalizes irresponsible conduct that puts
others at risk. For those individuals who say this legislation
criminalizes the disease, she offered the following parallel: It
would be like saying that owning a gun is criminal because you
shoot someone. In response to the Department of Health's statement
that the majority of HIV cases in Alaska resulted from consensual
sex, the question is, "Would consent have been given if the risk
were known?" The bill does not shift the burden of proof to the
defendant; the state would have to prove the defendant knew they
were infected and did not warn the person being exposed. The
provision of an affirmative defense protects the defendant; it does
not shift the burden of proof. When asked in the Senate Finance
Committee, the Department of Health and Social Services could not
provide any substantiation to the claim that the bill will have a
chilling effect on testing programs. In fact, the Illinois
Department of Health advised the Alaska Legislative Research
Section there was no decrease in testing as a result of their law.
This statement came in March 1995, six years after the Illinois law
had passed. Senate Bill 17 is modeled on the Illinois statute
which has been upheld in both the Illinois Appellate and Supreme
Courts. This legislation has no effect on needle exchange programs
in the state.
MS. KROGSENG noted that Congressman Coburn of Oklahoma, a medical
doctor, has introduced HR 1062, the HIV Prevention Act. At the
time SB 17 was drafted, HR 1062 had 90 co-sponsors in the U.S.
House of Representatives. She referred to the summary of the HIV
Prevention Act of 1997, which includes in its provisions, "Sense of
the Congress language that the states should criminalize the
intentional transmission of HIV." She said HR 1062 was endorsed by
the American Medical Association.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if there were any questions of Ms. Krogseng.
Number 0360
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "You indicated that Illinois in a four
year period - or I got two different dates there - but at least
they haven't seen any change in the number of tests since they've
invoked this law. Have you checked with any other states that may
have done the same thing? What I'm wondering about is, is the fact
that the number of tests being taken not decreasing because there
are far more people infected with AIDS each year so that the number
of tests could be going up, but the people being tested could be
still this stigma or this concern with a penalty like this of some
people deciding, 'hey I don't want to be tested - I don't want to
know' - even though the tests don't go down because the number of
people contacting the disease is going up."
MR. KROGSENG said she had read in a document that there had been a
decrease, but she was not aware of any other state being contacted
as the Legislative Research Section had conducted the research for
Senator Taylor's's office. She had read in a document that in one
area there was mention of a decrease in the number of testing
through the Department of Health, but it was believed the reason
for that was because of the increased testing by private sector
physicians which would not be counted in the Department of Health
as well as the home testing kits that can now be purchased at drug
stores.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER noted the testimony had been rather
compelling both ways on this bill and it had taken him awhile to
get it straight in his mind that the federal legislation proposed,
and the criminal legislation passed in at least one other state
based on that federal legislation, makes it a crime to
intentionally transmit HIV. The committee had heard testimony that
it is currently illegal under state statute to do that. He said,
"If I have HIV and I have sex with someone and not only don't tell
them about it, but have intent to intentionally transmit HIV, I
have committed a felony under our statutes. The problem is, I
think the federal legislation is a little bit suspicious for lack
of being forthright - no one can prove that. You cannot - well I
can't say that you can't because there's always the exception, but
in the case - the typical kind of case - Yah, I knew I had it, but
I didn't intend to give it to anybody - that puts a 95 percent
(indisc.) to prosecution unless you've got some really unusual
evidence. What this does, and I must step back to my prior career,
is make it possible to prosecute these cases. This, to me makes
sense. It says we have to show that you knew you had it, but if
you know that you've got it, you've got to be a blithering idiot
and then you're probably not going to be culpable of being charged
anyway, not to know the risks of this behavior and transferring it
to somebody else, and that is what will criminalize it; not this 'I
intend to transmit HIV' which is a next to impossible level of
proof to get."
Number 0657
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to move SB 17 from committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN objected.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked for a roll call vote. Representatives Dyson,
Porter, Vezey, Green and Bunde voted in favor of the motion.
Representative Kemplen voted against it. Representative Brice was
absent. Therefore, SB 17 moved from the House Health, Education
and Social Services Standing Committee by a vote of 5-1.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 0684
CHAIRMAN BUNDE adjourned the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee at 5:03 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|