03/12/2013 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB16 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 12, 2013
3:03 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Pete Higgins, Chair
Representative Wes Keller, Vice Chair
Representative Benjamin Nageak
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Lora Reinbold
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Geran Tarr
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 16
"An Act relating to citizenship requirements and an alcohol
impairment and drug testing program for applicants for and
recipients of specified cash assistance."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 16
SHORT TITLE: ADULT PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ELIGIBILITY
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KELLER
01/16/13 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/13
01/16/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/13 (H) HSS, JUD
02/12/13 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/12/13 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/12/13 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
JIM POUND, Staff
Representative Wes Keller
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 16 on behalf of the bill
sponsor, Representative Keller.
RON KREHER, Director
Director's Office
Division of Public Assistance
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during discussion of
HB 16.
JOY HUNTINGTON
Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC)
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of HB 16.
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Executive Director
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of HB 16.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:03:13 PM
CHAIR PETE HIGGINS called the House Health and Social Services
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:03 p.m.
Representatives Higgins, Keller, Seaton, Reinbold, and Nageak
were present at the call to order. Representatives Pruitt and
Tarr arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 16-ADULT PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ELIGIBILITY
3:04:17 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 16, "An Act relating to citizenship requirements
and an alcohol impairment and drug testing program for
applicants for and recipients of specified cash assistance."
3:04:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 16, labeled 28-LS0059\C, Mischel, 3/9/13,
as the working document. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
3:05:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER introduced proposed HB 16, as the sponsor
of the bill. He said that the CS, Version C, offered a tool for
the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) to allow
direct intervention for alcohol abuse and illegal drug abuse to
recipients and applicants of cash public assistance. He said
that "part of that mission [for public assistance] was to
promote self-sufficiency." He offered his belief that self-
sufficiency and addiction were "at least in tension... there is
a problem we have to deal with there." He stated that DHSS
would make an upfront determination for abuse of alcohol or use
of illegally obtained drugs when an applicant made a claim for
public assistance. The applicant would be required to sign a
sworn statement that they were not abusing alcohol or using
illegally obtained drugs. He stated that the proposed bill did
not prescribe any action should there be a determination for a
problem, as there were other means for addressing this issue.
He said that it was difficult to review the ramifications for
any changes. He suggested that this proposed bill would remove
the difficulty for this problem from the social workers. He
identified three areas of public assistance: general
assistance, adult assistance, and temporary assistance.
Summarizing the purpose for adult assistance, he read from AS
47.25.290: "to furnish financial assistance as far as
practicable to the needy, aged, blind and disabled persons, and
help them attain self-support and self-care." He offered his
belief that this law reflected a concern for "the addiction
problem." He opined that the proposed bill could have some
ramifications that would need to be addressed.
3:09:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER assessed that there was a complexity for
the role of public assistance.
3:09:48 PM
JIM POUND, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, directed attention to the sectional analysis for
Version C [Included in members' packets]. He relayed that
Section 1 of the proposed bill would require that an applicant
must be legally in Alaska and the United States in order to
apply for assistance. He stated that Section 2 would require an
applicant for general relief to sign a sworn statement that the
applicant was in the state legally, and would not abuse alcohol
or use illegally obtained drugs. He offered an example for the
possible legality of clinical marijuana. He moved on to Section
3, which established that the applicant was subject to
investigation, if there was suspicion for the abuse of alcohol
or the use of illegally obtained drugs. He said that a refusal
to submit to suspicion based testing could be used during an
administrative hearing or appeal. He said that Section 5
required the same aforementioned sworn statements by an
applicant for adult assistance. He stated that although adult
assistance was primarily given to the blind and the elderly
senior citizens, drugs and alcohol were also abused by these
applicants. He said that many people who grew up "out of the
sixties were exposed to it in some shape, form, or description
and we're the ones that are in that age group now,
unfortunately, so it's something that we have to look at in more
of a perspective of, those are the people that may still be
using illegal drugs or abusing alcohol because of their life."
He moved on to Section 7, which stated that refusal by
applicants for adult assistance to submit to a suspicion based
test could be used in an administrative hearing. He said that
Section 9 required the same sworn statement regarding the use
and abuse of alcohol and illegally obtained drugs by applicants
for temporary assistance. He said that Section 10 explained the
process for DHSS to contact a suspected individual and request a
drug or alcohol test. He said that benefits to an applicant
could also be restricted if there was false information on the
application. He declared that the principle of the proposed
bill was to give DHSS a tool which required an applicant to
state a standard of life. He opined that "this was a much
better direction to go, and the bill definitely does not have a
problem, as we understand it, from our legal... with a
constitutional issue."
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, indicating Section 10, added that an
applicant could be drug tested if suspected.
3:15:34 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS directed attention to page 1, line 1, Version C,
and asked to clarify whether this was directed toward all
assistance or just cash assistance.
MR. POUND replied that the proposed bill was directed at all
assistance, and that cash assistance was just one aspect. He
said that the bill would cover distribution for any benefits by
DHSS. He stated that this was "not dealing with things like
food stamps, and stuff like that, we're dealing with the actual
dollars and cents that are handed to an individual to take care
of their lives."
3:16:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if there were any limitations to the
proposed bill, specifically the senior benefits payment program.
He asked why the proposed bill included the blind, but not the
senior cash payments.
3:16:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER explained that, as adult assistance for
the aged was included under public assistance, it would be
covered by the proposed bill when an application was submitted.
He said that the proposed bill focused on cash distributions for
public assistance.
3:17:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON directed attention to AS 47.45.301, which
defined eligibility for the senior benefit cash program. He
explained that an eligible individual could receive monthly cash
assistance payments, if the household income did not exceed
certain levels. He asked if the proposed bill was targeting
some cash assistance programs, but not others. He asked why
Alaska's permanent fund dividend (PFD) was not included in the
proposed bill, as it was also a cash assistance program.
3:18:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to the suggestion for
inclusion of the PFD and the longevity bonus in the proposed
bill, said that he "did not have a clear answer to give you as
far as the distinction of why we just picked the public
assistance section of law, and not those." He offered his
belief that the proposed bill had to do with building self-
sufficiency and offer people assistance to get "back on their
feet" "in their quest to become productive citizens." He opined
that the PFD had a different premise, to share the benefit from
state resources, and had not been intended "to put somebody back
on their feet."
3:19:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD declared that the proposed bill was an
honorable attempt to "try to get people, and catch certain
circumstances that maybe we need to be aware of." She asked to
clarify whether individuals would still be eligible for medical
assistance if they were not able to receive cash assistance.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER offered his belief that this was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD stated that "the state still will be
funding the consequences of drug abuse."
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked that she address that to DHSS.
3:20:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK stated that it was difficult to respond
"in a good way," as any response would offend some people. He
acknowledged that there was a problem in rural Alaska, as there
were few jobs with few opportunities to be paid in cash. He
reported that often there were multiple families in one house,
and that the adults and seniors often received cash assistance,
which benefitted the children and the grandchildren. He stated
that a discontinuance of cash assistance because of alcohol and
drug abuse would impact many people, especially the elders and
the children, who needed the assistance. He allowed that, as
many assistance programs targeted Alaska Natives in rural
Alaska, the proposed bill would impact everyone in rural Alaska.
He voiced his agreement that "we all make choices, and alcohol
and marijuana are choices." He shared that he had previously
participated in alcohol and marijuana usage, but that long ago
he had decided to no longer partake. He declared that alcohol
dependence was a disease, that this proposed bill would just
punish the people who needed assistance, and do nothing to stop
the disease. He offered an anecdote about his personal need for
assistance, and the difficulties for receiving it. He declared
his concern for the people of rural Alaska who depended on
assistance at any given time, and he questioned how the proposed
bill would help.
3:26:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said that the proposed bill did address
the children.
3:26:29 PM
MR. POUND directed attention to page 5, line 12, Version C,
which read: "deny or terminate benefits, assign a protective
payee to manage cash assistance." He said that this would avoid
specific punishment to the children of those who abused drugs
and alcohol.
3:27:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK, in response, pointed out that the
proposed bill would punish someone, but continue to send cash
payments to another family member. He offered to explain the
economy in Bush Alaska, where there was little cash. He
expressed his concern for an unintended impact from this
proposed bill.
3:28:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER expressed his agreement that the proposed
bill did not fix the alcohol problem. He declared that there
were programs designed to deal with the alcohol problem, but
that the intent of the proposed bill was to "give tools to the
Department [of Health and Social Services] and to the Division
[of Public Assistance] so that when they know and can document
and find out when there is an alcoholism problem or a drug abuse
problem, that the other areas of services can be made available
to the people in the extent that they have them." He offered
agreement that there was a struggle for success with these
programs. He declared that he did not intend the proposed bill
to cause harm.
3:30:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD offered her belief that it was not the
state government's responsibility "to be giving out cash,
period, fundamentally." She opined that the proposed bill was
only identifying Alaskans as U.S. citizens, and simply
"identifying people who are abusing drugs and alcohol, is it a
wise thing to be giving cash to people who are abusing alcohol
and drugs, is that wise. We need to ask ourselves as a state,
is that the maximum return on our investment for our public
resource dollars." She suggested that the assistance money be
invested, instead, into treatment programs. She opined that the
proposed bill had "some real benefits to identifying where
problems are, and addressing them, and I think this could be a
good thing for the state."
3:31:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated, in response: "the spirit and the
heart behind what you're saying is exactly why I'm sitting here
carrying the bill." He expressed his desire for ways to solve
the problem.
3:31:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked for comments on the constitutionality
of the proposed bill, as her research had indicated that no
other similar state law had been found to be constitutional.
She relayed that Legislative Legal Services had indicated that
the committee substitute was also unconstitutional, which she
attributed to "the suspicion less testing portion of it." She
stated that she had not been able to find any evidence among the
proposed bill materials indicating that individuals receiving
public assistance were abusing drugs and alcohol. She cited a
study in Florida which revealed that only 2.6 percent of the
individuals receiving public assistance had tested positive for
drug and alcohol use, whereas 10 - 12 percent of the general
population had tested positive. She asked for a cost-benefit
analysis to the administration of the proposed program, and
whether the spending would outweigh the savings.
3:33:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that the proposed bill would not
spend any money on programs. He said that he was "stunned at
the fact, that they found that those on public assistance had
such a low percentage that tested positive" to drug and alcohol
abuse. He declared that he did not believe the data. He stated
that the proposed CS, Version C, had been written to address the
constitutional issues.
3:34:40 PM
MR. POUND declared that the proposed bill addressed reasonable
suspicion, not random testing, and was therefore not "suspicion
less." He relayed that he had discussed this with Legislative
Legal Services, and was advised "that this does meet muster."
3:35:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK asked about the grounds for reasonable
suspicion when applicants being denied benefits were in rural
Alaska. He asked about the cost benefit for going to a rural
village to test for reasonable suspicion of drug and alcohol
abuse.
3:36:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response, said that the bill proposed
an application for assistance, in which an individual had to
state that they were a resident of Alaska, did not abuse
alcohol, and did not take illegally obtained drugs. He stated
that should any individual be found to have misrepresented
information, then the Department of Health and Social Services
was empowered to do something, which included the removal of
cash benefits. He said that the admission by any person to
having a problem would allow DHSS to use the tools at their
disposal to address the problem.
3:39:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for a definition to the abuse of
alcohol.
3:40:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response, said that it was "based on
the definition of the person signing the document."
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON declared that many people used a lot of
alcohol, but did not feel that they abused it. He questioned a
legally binding document which asked for a sworn statement with
no standard, declaring that it was not enforceable. Referring
to Version C, page 4, line 31, he asked how an applicant for
temporary assistance could make "a sworn statement that members
of the family do not and will not, while receiving assistance,
abuse alcohol or use illegally obtained drugs."
3:42:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that he had no clear answer.
MR. POUND, in response to Representative Seaton, said that
temporary assistance primarily dealt with children, and he
offered his belief that, in a household situation, the intent
was to keep kids away from alcohol and drugs.
3:43:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked how a family could make a sworn
statement that kids were not partaking in drugs or alcohol. He
questioned page 5, line 16, noting that this could be determined
to be fraud with criminal liability because a family member
abused alcohol. He expressed concern for the consequences to
the sworn statement.
3:44:48 PM
MR. POUND replied that the proposed bill did not have any
criminal intent.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER suggested that Legislative Legal Services
could answer the question.
3:45:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD expressed her agreement for the need of
a definition to abuse. Directing attention to the suggestion by
Representative Tarr that the proposed bill was unconstitutional,
she declared "I have a real problem with that. I want someone
to show me where in our state or U.S. Constitution that says we
must give cash assistance to those abusing drugs and alcohol.
That just gives me great pause that people keep saying
everything's unconstitutional. It seems like a fear tactic to
me. Are we gonna interpret it at whim, our constitution, or are
we gonna read it for it's meant [intended meaning], honestly I
don't believe our constitution says that we have to do this."
She expressed her belief that the Alaska State Constitution
declares that the resources were for the maximum benefit of the
people. She offered her belief that a large percentage of
Alaskans would not support giving money to people abusing drugs
and alcohol as a maximum benefit to the people of Alaska. She
suggested to identify the problem, and to set up treatment
programs, as education and prevention was the wiser use for
finances. She declared that the current Department of Health
and Social Services budget was unsustainable, and that having
190,000 Alaskans on some sort of public assistance was an issue.
She stated that the intent of the proposed law was to "get
people independent."
CHAIR HIGGINS declared that the proposed bill was emotional, and
he did not want a constitutional debate. He suggested that
Legislative Legal Services could assist with the discussion, and
he wanted to limit this discussion to the proposed bill.
3:47:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK declared that it was necessary to access
resources, as that would create more jobs for rural Alaskans.
He confirmed that many people in the state had depended on
commercial fishing, but the lack of fish made this no longer
viable. He observed that many places in rural Alaska had
potential for development. He pointed out that many rural
Alaskans did not have the means to go out of state to even apply
for a job. He offered his belief that it was best to
concentrate efforts on creating access to the resources so that
people can get jobs. He asked how many people were taking cash
assistance and abusing the system. He offered a personal
anecdote of his family's dependence on public assistance, and
emphatically stated that the support from public assistance in
rural Alaska had allowed many members of his family to succeed.
3:52:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that the proposed bill was not
making a statement on public assistance; it was only attempting
to deal with substance abuse and self-sufficiency in that
context. He expressed his agreement that jobs were an answer,
and he offered his belief that the proposed bill did not take
away from that.
CHAIR HIGGINS expressed his agreement that jobs were important.
3:53:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, in response to an earlier comment by
Representative Reinbold, established that it was a report from
Legislative Research Services that established conflicts of the
proposed bill with the first, fourth and fifth amendments. She
offered to share that report with the members of the committee.
Noting that the proposed bill did not have a fiscal note, she
asked for more information on the cost to implement the proposed
bill, as it had cost other states with similar programs at least
$1 million. She asked if a fiscal note to administer this
proposed program would be forthcoming.
3:54:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER admitted that his earlier remark about no
cost for the proposed bill was only said in context for a
comparative cost to that of a program for substance abuse. He
stated "I am not going to divine what the department will say
the cost related to this is."
3:54:52 PM
MR. POUND informed the committee that Department of Health and
Social Services had not had time to do a fiscal note. He
assured the committee that a fiscal note would be forthcoming.
3:55:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the intention of the proposed
bill was for the drug and alcohol testing to be charged to the
individual or to be paid from a general fund.
MR. POUND replied that Department of Health and Social Services
and the regulatory process would make that determination.
3:56:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed to page 1, line 8, of the proposed
CS, and asked for an explanation to the "full scope" of the
parameters for "not otherwise precluded from eligibility under
state or federal law."
3:56:54 PM
MR. POUND replied that DHSS would know the eligibility
requirements, and he opined that "there are certain things
having to do with previous fraud or previous problems."
3:57:49 PM
RON KREHER, Director, Director's Office, Division of Public
Assistance, Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS),
affirmed that there were some potential impediments to the
success of the proposed bill. He directed attention to Section
1 and Section 2, which referred to the general relief assistance
program. He explained that recipients of this program were the
most indigent Alaskans, as they had virtually no income and
hardly any assets. He explained that there was almost no cash
transfer to a recipient, and that the primary uses were as
vendor payments for rent made directly to landlords and for
burial services.
4:00:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked to clarify that 90 percent of cash
transfers in adult assistance was for burials.
MR. KREHER replied that this section referred to the general
relief assistance program, and that adult public assistance was
a different program.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked to clarify that the 90 percent of
the actual cash transfer in the general relief assistance
program was for burial services.
4:01:11 PM
MR. KREHER clarified that the remaining amount was for rental
assistance, paid directly to a landlord. He said that the
proposed bill did have "some positive sense to assist
individuals and recipients of public assistance," and he
supported providing assistance for the greatest gain. He noted
that the general relief assistance program currently had
language which required citizenship; however, the senior
benefits program did not have a citizenship requirement, an
oversight that he suggested needed resolution. He said that the
general relief assistance program was for emergent needs.
4:03:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked to receive the specific language
for citizenship required by the general relief fund.
MR. KREHER replied that this was in regulation.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked how many cash assistance
participants there were in the state.
MR. KREHER replied that the general relief assistance was not a
cash assistance program, but a cash benefit program which was
not paid to the applicant.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD expressed her desire for information on
all the other cash assistance programs, and referred to an
earlier conversation with Mr. Kreher in which he stated that
190,000 Alaskans were receiving public assistance.
MR. KREHER agreed to supply that information.
4:05:15 PM
MR. KREHER stated that there were operational challenges to the
investigation of applications and recipients. He noted that the
investigation process was intended to consider eligibility
during the interview process, primarily for income, rental
costs, and other similar financial information. He directed
attention to the adult public assistance program, which served
the elderly, the blind, and the disabled, and noted that it was
rare for the opportunity to meet a client face to face,
especially for those in rural Alaska.
4:06:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the rural applications were made
on line, by mail, or with a fee agent.
MR. KREHER replied that an application could be mailed, but
there was not yet an online application process. He said that
virtually all the programs required an interview, although this
did not have to be performed face to face.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether most rural applications
consisted of a paper application, followed by a phone interview.
MR. KREHER explained that more than 300 people in more than 200
communities served as fee agents for the State of Alaska, and
that these agents received a fee for assisting individuals with
processing applications. He stated that the eligibility staff
would attempt to make contact with the applicant, if there was
missing information or the need for follow up.
4:08:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked who served as fee agents.
MR. KREHER replied that fee agents worked with DHSS eligibility
coordinators in regions throughout Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked for more information regarding the
background of an individual serving as a fee agent.
MR. KREHER replied that fee agents were individuals who were
interested in providing a community service, and were often
referred by a local village council, or a regional non-profit.
4:09:55 PM
MR. KREHER directed attention to Section 6 of the proposed bill,
AS 47.25.450, referring to the Adult Public Assistance program
which served the elderly, blind, and disabled of all ages. He
reported that the recipient could be assisted in application by
another individual. He said that the opportunity to base
reasonable suspicion for drug and alcohol abuse would be
challenging, in many situation. He announced that the greatest
latitude and flexibility was with the Alaska Temporary
Assistance Program, which provided cash assistance to families
with dependent children. He explained that this program had
work requirements and was time limited for assistance, and that
the department infrastructure provided case managers and
support. He relayed that the Adult Public Assistance program
did not have the same infrastructure to support screening and
drug testing, so those would be additional costs to this
program.
4:12:17 PM
MR. KREHER, in response to Representative Keller, said that
there were about 17-18,000 Adult Public Assistance cases for the
blind, disabled, and elderly. He said that there was usually
one adult for each case.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked if there was cash assistance
distributed to "these 17,000 people."
MR. KREHER said that cash was sent to these individuals or to an
authorized representative. Directing attention to the Temporary
Assistance program, he said there were about 3000 individuals,
and 25 percent of these cases entailed a non-needy relative
taking care of the children.
4:13:17 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS asked about the monthly allocation.
MR. KREHER said that he would supply the information.
4:13:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked, in regard to the 190,000 people
obtaining public assistance, how many received cash.
MR. KREHER replied that 60,000 were Medicaid recipients, and he
offered to research the remaining figures.
4:14:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked, assuming the proposed bill was
enacted, whether the applicants signing a paper would identify
"a large number" of individuals with alcohol and substance
abuse. He offered his belief that "it probably is a very
insignificant number we're talking to, compared to, for example,
what I would suspect anyway, for the temporary assistance
because of the category of people we're talking about, the
disabled..." He asked Mr. Kreher for his estimate to the number
of people involved. He speculated whether there would be any
problem applying this to only one arena, instead of all three.
He asked if this would be "getting back into the constitutional
problems." He asked whether the Adult Assistance program would
find evidence of a problem.
4:16:11 PM
MR. KREHER replied that this required a lot of speculation. He
said that it was very difficult to ascertain between occasional
use and abuse. He pointed out that alcohol abuse was very
difficult to test. He reported that a challenge was for the
referral process to confirm suspicion. He stated that it was
difficult to "measure the truth of a statement at any one point
in time," as an individual may not have been using drugs or
alcohol while signing the statement. He declared that the
number of alcohol and drug abusers among those receiving
assistance was no greater than the average number of abusers
among all Alaskans.
4:17:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK, referring to the 90 percent of assistance
paid for burials, asked about the payments for the balance.
MR. KREHER, in response to Representative Nageak, explained that
he was referring to the General Relief Assistance program, which
served about 1000 people. He clarified that 40 percent of this
group were very low income and received burial assistance funds,
which accounted for 90 percent of the General Relief Assistance
program funding.
4:19:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked to clarify that Section 1 of the
proposed CS referenced general relief, Section 5 referenced
adult assistance, and Section 9 referenced temporary assistance.
MR. KREHER clarified that Section 5 referenced Adult Public
Assistance. In response to Representative Tarr, he affirmed
that her reference in Section 9 was to the Alaska Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families program.
MR. KREHER directed attention to the reference of family members
on page 6, line 4, Version C, and said that about 25 percent of
the recipients of Alaska Temporary Assistance program benefits
were non-needy relatives, those individuals who cared for a
child, but did not have a need of their own. Consequently, the
benefits were just for the child. He observed that the proposed
bill would subject those non-needy relatives to the
investigatory process, as recipient was defined to include
everyone in the household, except children.
4:21:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked Mr. Kreher to validate the total
number of recipients for public assistance in the state.
MR. KREHER replied that he would report the number of people in
the state who received a benefit from the Division of Public
Assistance. In response to Representative Reinbold, he said
that it was between 194,000 and 197,000.
CHAIR HIGGINS asked if that number fluctuated seasonally.
MR. KREHER expressed agreement and said that "caseloads ebb and
flow" and this was a time period for increase. He offered to
supply the exact numbers.
4:23:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if the number of Alaskans receiving
public assistance was comparable to other states.
MR. KREHER replied that he did not know.
4:23:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for more information about the
protective payee, and if any unintended consequences could arise
from the designations.
MR. KREHER explained that a protective payee was assigned to
manage finances for someone who was not competent. He noted
that this was most common in the Adult Public Assistance
program, and that it was modeled after the social security
administration program. He shared that authorized
representatives could also be selected by the family for
representation on behalf of the household.
4:25:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, referring to page 5, line 16, Version C,
asked if this referred to alcohol abuse. He asked if DHSS might
assign a protective payee if a determination for alcohol abuse
had been made. He asked what the consequences would be for the
applicant.
MR. KREHER, in response, observed that this penalty provision
had been inserted, but should be in another section. He said
that the consequences would be the denial of benefits to an
individual with dependent children, and its subsequent effects.
4:28:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked to clarify that although it had been
stated earlier by the bill sponsor that this legislation was not
intended to lead to criminal investigation, other existing
statutes could be interpreted to necessitate reporting if the
children were determined to be at risk.
MR. KREHER expressed agreement that this could be a consequence.
4:29:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked if the cash distribution could be
used to buy alcohol.
MR. KREHER replied that there was not any condition on the use
of the cash distribution.
4:30:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said that he was determined not to enable
addiction while in the process of trying to help. He offered
his belief that it was necessary to determine whether a problem
existed.
MR. KREHER replied that he encouraged a focus on the existing
programs and services using the available resources and
controls. He allowed that the Alaska Temporary Assistance
Program was an ideal program on which to focus this proposed
service to identify substance and alcohol abuse.
4:32:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK stated that access to natural resources
would help the issues in the rural villages, as it would provide
jobs in rural Alaska. He pointed out that jobs in rural Alaska
would "help people to help themselves." He indicated that this
was the issue on which to concentrate.
4:33:52 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS opened public testimony.
4:34:16 PM
JOY HUNTINGTON, Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC), spoke about a
recent TCC presentation in Juneau regarding the Alaska Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families programs. She said that the
purpose had been "to get good information out there" and she
expressed her agreement with Representative Tarr that it was
unwise to give money to fund addiction and other social
ailments. She said that there was an emphasis on Alaska Natives
in the proposed bill and that TCC, as an operator of the Alaska
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, was dedicated
and committed to alcohol and drug abuse education. She affirmed
that TCC had implemented drug testing at the outset of the
program and that current policies emphasized awareness for drug
abuse. She pointed out that alcohol and drug abuse education
was a regular component of community awareness. She stated that
the success of the family was integral to the programs. She
listed job training and parenting classes as two reasons for the
drop in enrollment in the programs, as these trainings were
possible because of the flexibility of funding to the program.
She specified that addressing alcohol and drug abuse was just
one component of the larger picture to the program. She asked
that support be given to employment and training programs, local
economic development efforts, and alcohol and substance abuse
treatment and prevention services. She asked that the committee
review the current drug testing efforts and she opined, "If it's
not broken, we don't need to fix it." She pointed out that $8.5
million was being cut from the behavioral health budget, which
was an integral part to the overall success of the programs.
4:40:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD said that, as statute was more powerful
than policy, this proposed bill would reinforce the TCC efforts.
She expressed her assumption that TCC would support the proposed
bill.
MS. HUNTINGTON, in response to Representative Reinbold, said
that the process was not a cookie cutter approach, but was based
on success with the participants. She stated that a variety of
efforts allowed for greater success. She pointed out that drug
testing brought an expense that would be difficult for the
program operators to assume. She directed attention to the
federal website for the program, which stated that the purpose
of the program was to provide assistance and work opportunities
to needy families by granting states the federal funds and wide
flexibility to develop and implement their own welfare programs.
She offered her belief that state funding to tribal programs
should also respect this flexibility, as the native entities
emphasized the overall success and well-being of the family.
She emphasized that addressing alcohol and drug abuse would
always be "a part of that picture."
4:42:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD stated her support for the proposed
bill: "I'm a big believer in it, we do have a serious problem
with abuse in this state, we have serious abuse with alcohol, we
have serious drug abuse, and I think that screening them,
identifying them, and getting them into treatment, education and
prevention is the key."
4:43:28 PM
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU) of Alaska, directed attention to written testimony
which had been previously provided to the committee [Included in
members' packets]. He confirmed that the ACLU continued to
oppose the proposed bill and the proposed CS. In response to an
earlier remark by Representative Reinbold regarding the issue of
constitutionality of the proposed bill, he expressed agreement
that, although there was no requirement that a state provide
certain benefits or programs, once the state established a
program, it must meet both federal and State of Alaska
constitutional requirements. He offered to provide written
testimony of case law which stated that a forced search was not
constitutional. He declared that, although the CS was fashioned
as a suspicion based testing scheme, the current scheme did not
meet constitutional requirements, as it was a coerced search.
4:45:18 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS asked if the ACLU would assist with the
constitutional crafting for the proposed bill.
MR. MITTMAN expressed his agreement to work with the legislature
to make it constitutional. He reported that other states had
legislation for testing programs that had been found to be
constitutional, avoiding violation of the Bill of Rights.
4:46:16 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS left public testimony open.
[HB 16 was held over.]
4:46:45 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health and Social Services Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 4:46 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB016 CS Ver C.pdf |
HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Sectional Ver C.pdf |
HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Ver A.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 CS Ver U.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Legal Opinions - Court Case Constitutional.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Q&A's.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 CS Ver N.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Legal Opinions - Random Drug Testing Decisions.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - AK Health Report.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Congress Considers Drug Testing Welfare Recipients.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Drug Add.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Drug Alcohol Info.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Drug Testing Info.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Iditarod to Drug Test.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Mcdowell Report ( no print).pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Poor Drug Patterns.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Publications - Substance Abuse AK.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Supporting Documents - D Marshall.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Supporting Documents - ARR Testing.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Opposing Documents - Fax Testimony from Bethel.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB016 Opposing Documents - ACLU Review Const'l Issues.2013-02-12.pdf |
HHSS 2/12/2013 3:00:00 PM HHSS 3/12/2013 3:00:00 PM |
HB 16 |