Legislature(2017 - 2018)CAPITOL 106
04/27/2017 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB234 | |
| HB236 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 234 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 236 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 27, 2017
3:48 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Ivy Spohnholz, Chair
Representative Sam Kito
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Jennifer Johnston
Representative Colleen Sullivan-Leonard
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon, Vice Chair
Representative David Eastman
Representative Matt Claman (alternate)
Representative Dan Saddler (alternate)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 234
"An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska Health Care
Commission; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 236
"An Act extending the Alaska senior benefits payment program."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 234
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND ALASKA HEALTH CARE COMMISSION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GUTTENBERG
04/16/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/16/17 (H) HSS, FIN
04/25/17 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/25/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/27/17 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 236
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND SENIOR BENEFITS PAYMENT PROGRAM
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KAWASAKI
04/17/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/17/17 (H) HSS, FIN
04/25/17 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/25/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/27/17 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE DAVID GUTTENBERG
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 234 as the sponsor of the
bill.
KRISTIN CURTIS
Legislative Auditor
Legislative Audit Division
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of HB 234.
DEBORAH ERICKSON, Project Coordinator
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Health and Social Services
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of HB 234.
JEANNIE MONK, Vice President
Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association (ASHNHA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 234.
MERCEDES COLBERT, Staff
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 236 on behalf of the bill
sponsor, Representative Kawasaki.
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT KAWASAKI
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions about HB 236, as the
sponsor of the bill.
MONICA WINDOM, 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 236.
KEN HELANDER, Advocacy Director
AARP
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 236.
DAVID BLACKETER, Chair
Alaska Commission on Aging
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 236.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:48:15 PM
CHAIR IVY SPOHNHOLZ called the House Health and Social Services
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:48 p.m.
Representatives Spohnholz, Kito, Sullivan-Leonard, and Tarr were
present at the call to order. Representative Johnston arrived
as the meeting was in progress. [Due to technical difficulties,
the first ten minutes of the recording is at a very low volume.]
3:49:06 PM
HB 234-EXTEND ALASKA HEALTH CARE COMMISSION
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 234, "An Act extending the termination date of
the Alaska Health Care Commission; and providing for an
effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE DAVID GUTTENBERG, Alaska State Legislature,
paraphrased from the Sponsor Statement [Included in members'
packets] which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
The Alaska Health Care Commission was first
established by Governor Palm on December 4, 2008 under
Administrative Order #246. In 2010, the legislature
passed SB 172, establishing the Alaska Health Care
Commission in Statute. The legislature's intent was
that the Commission would be a permanent instrument to
address the need for health care reform in our state.
The Commission worked to identify opportunities, as
well as a broad set of strategies, to improve the
quality, accessibility and availability of health care
for all citizens of the State. These strategies and
recommendations can be found in the Commission's
reports that were issued annually from 2009-20 14.
In 2015 the Commission was defunded. Alaska's need for
health care reform remains one of the most critical
challenges we face. At $10 billion in total spending
annually25% of which is administered by the state
government health care is one of Alaska's largest
consumer product industries. When this enormous scale
is considered in conjunction with the fact that that
the state government is the largest single payer for
those services, there is a clear need for an
instrument that identifies the costs and benefits of
the health care system, and identifies strategies for
ensuring sustainability therein. Extending the Alaska
Health Care Commission will give the state a tool to
address this crucial priority.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG added that the proposed bill had a
zero-fiscal note. He said that the Alaska Health Care
Commission, when funded, had done considerable things, even
though, he opined, it did not have as large a perspective on the
state health care. He acknowledged that the commission did make
considerable recommendations, even though these recommendations
were all too often put on the shelf and never read. He stated
that the commission was a tool for the Department of
Administration and Department of Health and Social Services to
"have the ability to respond in a cohesive way" to any changes
in the health care environment.
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD shared her background with the
commission and asked about the report recommendation to not
further this specific commission, which was based on a challenge
for the development of a statewide health plan.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG replied that the audit had stated that
the commission was not operating in the state's best interest
although it was not being funded and was not functioning. He
offered his belief that there had been consideration for the
overall "larger picture that the state should be doing. Should
it be looking at the entire, to build a comprehensive plan from
the top down." He stated that the commission did offer
considerable recommendations. He noted that although some of
the commission members felt more should be done, the focus had
been narrowed. He expressed his agreement with the audit which
reported that an entire picture of the state should be reviewed.
He pointed to the vastness of all the components of the
Department of Health and Social Services and acknowledged that
he did not know how to develop the entire picture even as there
was a lot to do.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG pointed to the work already
accomplished, and the current recommendations, noting that there
was still so much to be addressed by the legislature.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked if he had considered "revisiting the scope
of the commission's work" along with the extension of the
termination date.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG opined that the current scope was
quite broad, noting that there was only one person currently
designated to the commission, the Chief Medical Officer from the
Department of Health and Social Services.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked how the work could be accomplished with a
zero-fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG explained that this would only affect
travel, so, until there were anticipated costs, there would be a
zero-fiscal note. If something was only being extended, without
any changes, then there would not be a fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON asked when the commission had stopped.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG, in response, said that the technical
answer would be at the last election, as the membership changed.
He pointed out that the commission had not actually lapsed, even
though it had not been functioning due to a lack of funding and
a meeting had not been called. He added that there were not any
required meetings or functions.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON expressed her confusion, reiterating
that there was not a fiscal note because there had not been an
increase in cost because there had not been a functioning
commission. She asked if, currently, there was any amount
budgeted for this commission.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG, in response, offered his belief that
the state responsibility to the commission had been for
staffing, and that the only costs were for teleconferencing. He
said that until a meeting was anticipated, there was not any
anticipated cost.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ suggested that this was an issue whereby to
ensure that the commission had the funding it needed, it would
need a directive.
4:00:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR offered her belief that the commission had
completed all the work originally recommended.
4:01:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG opined that the recommended work
extended back beyond that last commission report and there had
been many recommendations put forward while few had been
completed. He said that the previous budgets from FY13 - FY15
had been $350 - $450,000. He stated that the commissioners had
asked that the commission be renewed. He noted that the zero-
fiscal note had been presented by the commission office.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ surmised that although the commission had work
to be done, they had stopped acting due to a lack of funds.
4:03:13 PM
KRISTIN CURTIS, Legislative Auditor, Legislative Audit Division,
Alaska State Legislature, explained that there were two audits
in the meeting packets, dated 2013 and 2016. She explained that
the purpose of a sunset [clause] was to determine whether a
board or commission was serving the public's interest and
whether it should be extended. She directed attention to the
2013 audit [Included in member's packets] and stated that this
was the first time the commission had been subject to sunset,
and background had been included in the report. She reported
that the Alaska Health Care Commission was created as a means
for health care reform and was first established in 2008 by
administrative order. She added that it was then established in
statute in 2010. She reported that the legislature had intended
for the commission to achieve reform through the development of
a statewide health plan, which was to be based on education,
sustainability, management efficiency, health care
effectiveness, public private partnerships, research, personal
responsibility and individual choice. The original commission,
in 2008, had stated that it was not its responsibility to
develop a plan, but instead, the commission had focused its
efforts on specific policy recommendations. When the commission
was re-established in statute in 2010, the members had agreed to
continue the prior commission's work and had adopted the same
general approach. Instead of working on a state plan, the
commission collected information from various cost studies and
developed high level policy recommendations. The commission
also established general priorities which did evolve into a
strategic framework, included as Appendix 8 of the 2013 audit
report. She shared that the 2013 audit had concluded that the
commission was operating in the public's interest, although
improvements in developing a state plan were needed to justify
its continued existence. The commission's statutory purpose was
to provide recommendations for and foster the development of a
statewide health plan to address the quality accessibility and
availability of health care for citizens of the state. The
legislature intended the commission to work collaboratively with
Department of Health and Social Services to develop a
comprehensive health plan. Although various policy
recommendations were developed, the audit had determined that
the commission and the department had not collaborated to
develop the plan. The audit recommended to limit the extension
to three years and discussed this recommendation with the
Commissioner of Department of Health and Social Services and the
Alaska Health Care Commission. The audit report concluded that
the commission was active, and the report was positive in its
review for all the activities accomplished by the commission.
She shared that several studies had been conducted by the
commission, and a foundation for a plan had been created. She
directed attention to Appendix A, the strategic framework for
the plan, which, she declared, lacked actionable components for
implementation and did not specify actions to be taken, a time
frame for completion, the definition of what constituted a
successful outcome and how that would be measured, or the
organization responsible for taking the action. She reported
that it was determined that the activities of the commission may
not effectively impact health care in Alaska. She stated that
the lack of a plan was caused by some ambiguous statutes,
outlying responsibilities, and a lack of coordination between
Department of Health and Social Services and the commission.
She directed attention to the 2013 audit, page 35, which listed
the departmental response to the audit. She shared that the
main recommendation was for the commission to work with the
commissioner of Department of Health and Social Services to
identify and define the responsibilities and roles and then
pursue development of the plan accordingly. Directing attention
back to page 35, she noted that the department had partially
concurred with that recommendation. They had suggested that the
framework had not received enough credit as a plan, even though
it had offered many recommendations and had made a lot of
progress. She added that the commissioner of Department of
Health and Social Services had written in support of the
recommendation, offering to provide a memo to the commission to
delineate its responsibilities and then actively work with the
commission to make this actionable plan. The commissioner would
also direct the department to collaborate on the development of
a measurable action plan to implement the commission's
significant policy recommendations. After this report was
issued, the House Finance Committee Sub Committee on Health and
Social Services held a hearing on October 22, in Fairbanks, and
the commissioner of Department of Health and Social Services
responded to the report.
4:08:58 PM
MS. CURTIS reiterated the comments by the commissioner, which
she read:
Where I have struggled with the health care commission
is that the recommendations that come out of them are
not useful. I don't say that in a negative sense.
It's been at the 50,000-foot level and if you are
going to affect change in health care for Alaskans, it
can't be at the 50,000-foot level, it has to be
focused. It can't be, "We have to reform the way
payments are to be made." That doesn't help me. It's
getting to the specifics. They are now beginning to
dive down into the specifics and I think that
continued involvement with them will lead to a
meaningful plan going forward. Medicaid needs to be
part of that. Medicaid is a big part of your budget,
as well as a big part of my budget. It's how to get
to that, how to narrow the focus, how to do a better
job.
MS. CURTIS directed attention to the sunset audit report in
2016, and reported that initially, after this meeting with the
commissioner in Fairbanks, there was momentum as the committee
met and discussed a shift of focus to move an action plan
forward. However, as this initial momentum dwindled, there was
no significant progress in the development of a plan and the
commission was de-funded on July 1, 2015, for FY16. She shared
that the commission had been part of the budget of the
commissioner of Department of Health and Social Services, so
that all the funding came through the regular budget cycle.
4:10:44 PM
MS. CURTIS moved on to page 22 of the 2016 audit, the
departmental response to the most recent recommendation. She
reported that the audit conclusion had been, as the commission
was not operating in the public's interest and not meeting its
statutory purpose to develop a plan, to not extend the
commission. She shared that Department of Health and Social
Services did not agree with this conclusion and had expressed
its disagreement that the legislature had intended for an action
plan. She added that the department stated that they had agreed
to the prior audit, and they were not in agreement with the need
for an actionable plan. She stated reaffirmation for the
recommendation that the commission was not serving a public
interest by ensuring that its good work somehow translated to
change.
4:12:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD mused that this commission had
been formed over many years, utilizing a lot of "time, energy,
and talent." She opined that although it was unfortunate that
there was a recommendation to not move forward, if something was
not working it should not be funded. She asked for any specific
reasons to this loss of direction, and if there was any
possibility for moving forward utilizing the accrued knowledge.
MS. CURTIS offered her belief that the commission had done "a
lot of excellent work and a foundation has been laid." She said
that it was necessary to take it to the next level to use those
recommendations for change. She pointed out that Commissioner
Streur [Department of Health and Social Services] had taken a
lot of the accountability during the last audit upon himself,
and that he was "on-board" for helping the department implement
those recommendations. She noted that there had also been a
change in the administration. She shared that during the budget
process, there was a lot of frustration from the House Finance
Committee with activities of the commission. She offered her
belief that as the foundation had been laid, continuation of the
commission was a possibility. She pointed out that there was an
ambiguity in the statute and a lack of clarity for what the
commission should be doing going forward, all of which needed to
be clarified should the commission continue.
4:14:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON asked about the overlap between the
Alaska Health Care Authority and this commission, the Alaska
Health Care Commission.
4:14:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG, in response, said that the Alaska
Health Care Commission was intended to design an overall state
health care plan; whereas, the Alaska Health Care Authority was
designed to bring all the state and public entities together to
figure a way to coordinate efforts for efficiencies of pay and
larger pooling for prescription drugs for health care coverage.
He declared that there was a significant difference between the
two groups.
4:16:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON asked whether this included overall
health efficiencies or was it just in purchasing power.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG opined that "theoretically one would
get you the other." He explained that it was not an overall
health care plan, but a plan to better define and deliver
services.
4:17:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD said that although she valued
the work to date, she failed to see a plan in place for how to
move forward. She asked if the sponsor would consider a one-
year extension for the commission, in order to return with a
clear plan.
4:18:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG stated that the department could speak
for themselves for their capability and their intent. He
expressed support for the extension as, otherwise, the
commission would need to be recreated.
4:18:47 PM
DEBORAH ERICKSON, Project Coordinator, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Health and Social Services, offered
some background, noting that she had been the Executive Director
of the Alaska Health Care Commission during the time it was
funded and active. She acknowledged the importance for
maintaining the "ability to bring the statute back at some
point." She reported that the administration did support the
proposed bill, and she directed attention to the letter of
support from Commissioner Davidson [Included in members'
packets], pointing out that Ms. Davidson had served on the
commission as the representative from the tribal health system.
She shared that the commission had been established through an
administrative order by former Governor Palin, and subsequently,
the legislature had established the commission in statute in
2010. She stated that there were 11 voting members representing
various stakeholders, all of whom were appointed by the
governor. She added that there were also three ex-officio seats
on the commission, one each for the Office of the Governor, the
House of Representatives, and the Senate. She noted that the
commission was first established when the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) had just been passed, and that the
commission was most likely the only body in the state that
conducted an analysis of the impact of the PPACA in Alaska.
Subsequently, in each following year, the commission would
report to the legislature on the status of implementation of the
PPACA. She reported that the original vision for the commission
had been for improvement of health and health care in the state,
with three measurable directives and eight core strategies for
transforming the health care system, which included: increase
price and quality transparency, pay for value and move away from
fee for service payment structure, increase the focus on
prevention, and engage employers to improve health plans and
employee wellness. She reported that within the eight core
strategies, there were more than 75 specific policy
recommendations, although these did not delve into the
operational details for implementation. She added that each
year there was a new study of the current system to add to the
body of knowledge.
4:26:13 PM
MS. ERICKSON reported that the commission had contracted with
the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) to do an
economic analysis of health care spending and health care cost
drivers, as well as an ISER survey of Alaskan employers and
their health benefit practices. She added that the commission
had also contracted with an actuarial firm for a detailed
actuarial study of the differences between pricing and
reimbursement for health care services in Alaska compared to
other states in the region. She pointed out that the results of
these studies were still requested. She mentioned that the
commission did produce an annual report, as well as testifying
to numerous committees and individual legislators.
4:27:55 PM
MS. ERICKSON directed attention to the fiscal note and stated
that the commission had ended when the legislature removed the
funding after the last election, even though Commissioner
Davidson [Department of Health and Social Services] still
actively supported the work of the commission. She noted that
deep budget cuts were impacting direct services to individual
Alaskans. She declared that both the department and the
administration did support the proposed bill, with an intent to
maintain the commission statutory authority. Then, should the
governor or the legislature deem it necessary to re-activate the
commission, this could be done quickly. She offered her belief
that as the department could not support re-activation of the
commission without funding appropriated by the legislature, the
department had filed the zero-fiscal note with an understanding
"to keep the commission on the books."
4:30:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD asked about a one-year extension
for the commission, to allow for a clear established plan to be
developed for presentation to the legislature. She suggested
that there was a disconnect between setting the policy and the
planning aspect.
4:31:42 PM
MS. ERICKSON replied that without funding, the Department of
Health and Social Services did not have the resources to put
that plan together. She expressed her concern that currently,
as there were no members of the commission, it would take time
to recruit appointments for the new members. She pointed out
that it had been more than two years since the commission had
met, and it would be necessary to review the prior policy
recommendations and move toward development of these. She
opined that one year would not be an adequate time to re-
activate the commission, and that the department would not be
prepared to re-activate unless the legislature was prepared to
fund it through a fiscal note. She suggested that more
legislative intent with specific directions to the commission
would be helpful.
4:35:08 PM
MS. CURTIS explained that the Division of Legislative Audit
conducted the sunset audit the year before termination, hence, a
two-year extension would be the minimum as a one-year extension
would mean the audit would have to be performed immediately,
which was not logistically possible.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked if there had ever been a similar extension
of authority for a commission without funding.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG replied that he did not remember any.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ reflected that there were several highly
divergent paths for either a re-envisioning of the commission to
better serve the current needs, or for just keeping it on the
books. She pointed out that the health care budget was a huge
driver in the state economy, that "health care costs are out of
control" even though costs alone was not the solution. She
added that individual behaviors and quality were necessary
components. She stated that she was not surprised that the
commission was not able to meet its charges. She questioned
whether thoughtful strategies for addressing all the health care
issues should be found for the longer term or should there be
immediate re-envisioning while the state was addressing huge
fiscal challenges.
4:37:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG suggested that the committee read the
commission reports for the core strategies from 2013, which
included: use best available evidence in decision making,
increase price efficiency and transparency, pay for value,
engage employees in approved health care plans and wellness,
enhance quality and efficiencies of care on the front end,
increase dignity and quality of care for serious and terminally
ill patients, build a foundation of sustainable health care, and
focus on prevention. He emphasized that a lot had been done
prior. He said that a one-year extension was not feasible and
that without funding, nothing would be accomplished.
4:40:14 PM
JEANNIE MONK, Vice President, Alaska State Hospital and Nursing
Home Association (ASHNHA) stated that ASHNHA supported proposed
HB 234 and the effort to extend the Alaska Health Care
Commission. She reported that the purpose of the commission,
according to the statute, was very high level: "provide
recommendations for and foster the development of the statewide
plan to address quality, accessibility, and availability of
health care for all citizens." She noted that the Alaska State
Hospital and Nursing Home Association was one of the voting
members on the past commissions, and she offered her belief that
there was value for maintaining the commission in statute and
having it available as a policy tool. She stated support for
the comments related to re-envisioning the commission. Although
the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association did not
always agree with the positions taken by the commission or with
all the topics chosen for study, it supported the process and
the discussions whereby the stakeholders could come together.
She declared that there was potential for the commission to play
a role in the future development of health care policy, and that
an extension of the sunset date may make it possible to use this
structure without having to recreate the commission.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON asked if this commission had offered a
forum for major health issues that had not been previously
available.
MS. MONK replied that it was a forum to bring together multiple
sectors of the health care industry for discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON asked if this forum was more conducive
when trying to meet the same goals for improving health care.
MS. MONK replied that the environment was very different today,
as six years ago there had been very little statewide discussion
about health care, costs, and services. Now, there was a
tremendous amount of discussion, which she opined was driven by
fiscal issues. She offered her belief that the focus of the
health care commission could be different today. In response to
Representative Johnston, she said that the health care
commission focused on the entire health care system, where the
health care authority had a much more limited scope.
4:45:22 PM
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that HB 234 would be held over.
HB 236-EXTEND SENIOR BENEFITS PAYMENT PROGRAM
4:45:37 PM
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 236, "An Act extending the Alaska senior
benefits payment program."
4:46:34 PM
MERCEDES COLBERT, Staff, Representative Scott Kawasaki, Alaska
State Legislature, paraphrased from the Sponsors Statement
[included in members' packets] which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
House Bill 236 would extend the Senior Benefits
Program sunset clause to 2022, ensuring another four
years of support for low income seniors across Alaska.
Without action, the program would end in 2018.
The Senior Benefits Program protects low-income
seniors by providing them with modest cash assistance
to pay for expenses like food, heating, electricity,
transportation and prescription medication.
The program was established in 2007 and currently
provides assistance to nearly 12,000 Alaskans ages 65
and older with incomes at 75 percent, 100 percent, and
175 percent of the federal poverty level. Assistance
ranges from $47 to $250 a month for eligible seniors
depending on income and the size of the appropriation
from the Alaska State Legislature. The Senior Benefits
Program is a successor to the Longevity Bonus, which
was created in 1972.
This important program protects seniors who have spent
a lifetime building this state. It lends a small hand
to low-income seniors who need assistance to help make
ends meet. Terminating this program would put
thousands of seniors at risk for losing means to buy
essential items necessary for maintaining a healthy
lifestyle.
4:49:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD asked if there was a different
process for new applicants to this benefit.
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT KAWASAKI, Alaska State Legislature,
acknowledged that the number of beneficiaries was not static, as
people moved, died, or decided they did not want the benefit.
He said the same amount had been budgeted for the last several
years, about $20 million. He said that sometimes the payments
would take a different effect relative to the number of
recipients.
4:50:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD asked if anyone could apply and
whether there was an open enrollment period.
4:51:42 PM
MONICA WINDOM, Director, Director's Office, Division of Public
Assistance, Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS),
said that an individual could apply at any time and there was
not a specific enrollment period.
4:52:34 PM
KEN HELANDER, Advocacy Director, AARP, stated support for the
continuation of the senior benefit program, pointing out that
the program would sunset next year if not extended. He reported
that his office had received many calls from seniors who were
dependent on the benefit from this program. He explained that
these people were not able to supplement their already low
incomes with a part time job, and "really have very little
capacity to cut expenses by being more frugal." He declared
that these were "people who are living on the edge ... and they
were struggling in independent situations, not wanting to have
to leave home, have to go into a higher level of care that
ultimately will cost the state a great deal more money per
person than these small benefits do." He reported that the AARP
policy was that state resources should go, even in times of
scarcity, to the people who were most vulnerable and most needy.
He added that this program was part of the safety net that the
community depended upon.
4:55:27 PM
DAVID BLACKETER, Chair, Alaska Commission on Aging, said that
all the previous comments and testimony had "been right on." He
declared support for proposed HB 236. He shared some of his
personal expenses and difficulties to make ends meet, adding
that there was "very little cushion" for life spending and minor
emergencies. He pointed out that low income people in Alaska
were similar to the state, both had reduced income and increased
bills. He acknowledged that there was belt tightening but
emphasized that "we're down to the end of the belt." He said
that this help was very much needed, and he strongly urged
passage of proposed HB 236.
CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that HB 236 would be held over.
4:59:08 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health and Social Services Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 4:59 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB234 Supporting Document Chapter 18.09 Health Care Commission Statute.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Supporting Document-AHCC Annual Report 2014.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Supporting Document-AHCC-Audit 2013.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Supporting Document-AHCC-Final-Report-Audit 2017.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB 234 ver A 4.17.17.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Sponsor Statement 4.17.17.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Fiscal Note DHSS--DSS 4.25.17.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Supporting Document-Support Letter 4.24.17.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB234 Supporting Document Office of the Governor_ Administrative Order 246.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 234 |
| HB 236 ver A.PDF |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 9/28/2017 2:00:00 PM HHSS 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 236 |
| HB236 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 236 |
| HB236 Supporting Documents AARP Letter Support.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 9/28/2017 2:00:00 PM HHSS 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 236 |
| HB236 Supporting Documents Alaska Commission on Aging.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 9/28/2017 2:00:00 PM HHSS 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 236 |
| HB236 Supporting Documents Arneson Support Letter.pdf |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 9/28/2017 2:00:00 PM HHSS 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 236 |
| HB236 Supporting Documents Senior Benefits Program Fact Sheet.PDF |
HHSS 4/25/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 4/27/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 236 |