05/14/2021 08:00 AM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB204 | |
| Presentation(s): State & Local Workers' Rights Enforcement | |
| HB91 | |
| SB12 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 204 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 91 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | SB 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
May 14, 2021
8:06 a.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Zack Fields, Co-Chair
Representative Ivy Spohnholz, Co-Chair
Representative Calvin Schrage
Representative Liz Snyder
Representative James Kaufman
Representative Ken McCarty
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative David Nelson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 204
"An Act relating to the presumption of compensability for a
disability resulting from certain cancers in firefighters."
- HEARD & HELD
PRESENTATION(S): STATE & LOCAL WORKERS' RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 91
"An Act exempting veterinarians from the requirements of the
controlled substance prescription database."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 12
"An Act relating to temporary courtesy licenses for military
spouses; and relating to the Department of Commerce, Community,
and Economic Development."
- MOVED SB 12 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 204
SHORT TITLE: WORKERS' COMP DISABILITY FOR FIREFIGHTERS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KAUFMAN
05/05/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/05/21 (H) L&C
05/14/21 (H) L&C AT 8:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 91
SHORT TITLE: CONTROLLED SUB. DATA: EXEMPT VETERINARIAN
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WOOL
02/18/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/21 (H) L&C, RES
05/14/21 (H) L&C AT 8:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: SB 12
SHORT TITLE: MILITARY SPOUSE COURTESY LICENSE
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) KAWASAKI
01/22/21 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/21
01/22/21 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/21 (S) STA, L&C
03/04/21 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/04/21 (S) Heard & Held
03/04/21 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/11/21 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/11/21 (S) Heard & Held
03/11/21 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/22/21 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/22/21 (S) Moved SB 12 Out of Committee
04/22/21 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/23/21 (S) STA RPT 3DP 1NR
04/23/21 (S) DP: SHOWER, KAWASAKI, COSTELLO
04/23/21 (S) NR: HOLLAND
04/26/21 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/26/21 (S) Moved SB 12 Out of Committee
04/26/21 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/28/21 (S) L&C RPT 3DP
04/28/21 (S) DP: COSTELLO, REVAK, GRAY-JACKSON
05/03/21 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
05/03/21 (S) VERSION: SB 12
05/04/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/04/21 (H) STA, L&C
05/06/21 (H) MLV REPLACES STA REFERRAL
05/11/21 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/11/21 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/12/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
05/12/21 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
05/13/21 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/13/21 (H) Moved SB 12 Out of Committee
05/13/21 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
05/14/21 (H) L&C AT 8:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
MATTHEW HARVEY, Staff
Representative James Kaufman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint on HB 204 on behalf
of Representative Kaufman, prime sponsor.
TIM BENNINGFIELD, Fire Chief
Chugiak Volunteer Fire and Rescue
Chugiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information during the hearing on
HB 204.
LORI WING-HEIER, Director
Division of Insurance
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
204.
CHARLES COLLINS, Director
Division of Workers' Compensation
Department of Labor and Workforce Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
204.
TERRI GERSTEIN, Director
State and Local Enforcement Project
Harvard Law School Labor and Worklife Program
Cambridge, Massachusetts
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint on State & Local
Workers' Rights Enforcement.
REPRESENTATIVE ADAM WOOL
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, introduced HB 91.
ASHLEY CARRICK, Staff
Representative Adam Wool
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint on HB 91 on behalf
of Representative Wool, prime sponsor.
RACHEL BERNGARTT, DVM, Chair
Board of Veterinary Examiners
Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 91.
MARY ANN HOLLICK, DVM
Alaska Veterinary Medical Association
Chugiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 91.
MCKAYLA DICK, DVM, President
Alaska Veterinary Medical Association
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 91.
PAM VENTGEN, Executive Director
Alaska State Medical Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 91.
JOE HAYES, Staff
Senator Scott Kawasaki
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 12 on behalf of Senator
Kawasaki, prime sponsor.
TAMMIE PERREAULT, Northwest Regional Liaison
Defense-State Liaison Office
U.S. Department of Defense
Olympia, Washington
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 12.
SARA CHAMBERS, Director
Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on SB
12.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:06:29 AM
CO-CHAIR ZACK FIELDS called the House Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:06 a.m.
Representatives Schrage, Fields, Kaufman, McCarty, and Snyder
were present at the call to order. Representatives Spohnholz
arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 204-WORKERS' COMP DISABILITY FOR FIREFIGHTERS
8:07:03 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 204, "An Act relating to the presumption of
compensability for a disability resulting from certain cancers
in firefighters."
8:07:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN, as prime sponsor, explained that HB 204
would add breast cancer to the list of presumed disability
coverages for firefighters, so long as the firefighter could
establish medically that the breast cancer was caused by work as
a firefighter.
8:08:29 AM
MATTHEW HARVEY, Staff, Representative James Kaufman, Alaska
State Legislature, presented a PowerPoint [hard copy included in
the committee packet] titled "House Bill 204; Workers'
Compensation Disability for Firefighters," on behalf of
Representative Kaufman, prime sponsor. He presented slide 2,
"HB 204: Introduction," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Firefighting is an inherently
dangerous job.
It is important that workers
compensation insurance provides
coverage for the inherent risks in
that job.
Currently, there is an oversight in
Alaska Statutes regarding that
coverage: Breast Cancer.
MR. HARVEY presented slide 3, "Breast Cancer Risk -
Firefighters," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Key Facts:
.notdef Male firefighters are 7.5 times more likely to
die from breast cancer than their counterparts not in
fire service (Ma et al, 2005)
.notdef Studies that have evaluated cancer risk
among women firefighters suggest they may
be at an elevated incidence of risk for breast
cancer (Daniels et al, 2014).
.notdef Women in the U.S. have a 1 in 8 (12 %)
lifetime risk of contracting breast cancer.
MR. HARVEY presented slide 4, "House Bill 204," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
HB 204 would add breast cancer to the list of presumed
disability coverages for firefighters, so long as the
firefighter could establish that the firefighter was
exposed to a known carcinogen associated with breast
cancer
MR. HARVEY presented slide 5, "Alaska Statute 23.30.121," which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Breast Cancer would join the existing list of diseases
alongside:
1. Respiratory Disease
2. Cardiovascular Events (Limited)
3. Primary Brain Cancer
4. Malignant Melanoma
5. Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
6. Bladder Cancer
7. Ureter Cancer
8. Kidney Cancer
9. Prostate Cancer
MR. HARVEY presented slide 6, "Alaska Statute 23.30.121," which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Several standard limitations apply for presumption of
compensability. The firefighter must:
1. Have been a firefighter for at least seven years,
2. Have had initial and annual medical exams showing
no evidence of disease,
3. Be able to demonstrate exposure to a known
carcinogen while in the Fire Service,
4. At a minimum, be certified as a Firefighter I.
8:10:51 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked how a firefighter would demonstrate
exposure to a known carcinogen.
MR. HARVEY discussed keeping a record of exposures.
8:11:27 AM
MR. HARVEY resumed his PowerPoint with slide 7, "Alaska Statute
23.30.121," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Other qualifying criteria would apply, including:
1. Coverage may be denied based on:
a. Use of tobacco products,
b. Physical fitness and weight,
c. Lifestyle decisions,
d. Hereditary factors, and
e. Exposure from other employment/non-employment
activities.
2. Post-employment coverage is available:
a. Three months accrued for every year of service
b. Five-year maximum.
MR. HARVEY presented slide 8, "Senate Bill 131," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Fourteen states include breast cancer in presumptive
laws:
1. Arizona
2. Arkansas
3. Colorado
4. Idaho
5. Iowa
6. Maine
7. Maryland
8. Missouri
9. Montana
10. New Mexico
11. New York
12. Oregon
13. Virginia
14. Wisconsin
15. (Alaska?)
8:12:23 AM
TIM BENNINGFIELD, Fire Chief, Chugiak Volunteer Fire and Rescue,
provided information on HB 204 on behalf of the Alaska
Firefighters Association. He pointed out that the PowerPoint
presentation stated that 4 percent of firefighters in the U.S.
are female; in Chugiak, however, women comprise 34 percent of
all firefighters. He said there are multiple ways for
firefighters to use technology to document exposure to
carcinogens.
8:15:14 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked for some more detail about the tracker.
MR. BENNINGFIELD explained that when there is a fire, the
firefighters are documented as having entered a structure.
Later, he said, the firefighter can log the exposure on an app.
8:17:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether the tracking record is sent
to a collective site within the state or a certain division.
MR. BENNINGFIELD replied, "That would be attached to each
individual firefighter."
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether the information goes to a
database for analysis.
MR. BENNINGFIELD responded that the vendors that created the
apps currently archive the information, as well as control who
has access to the data.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether there are multiple apps
used, and where the information goes.
MR. BENNINGFIELD replied that there are multiple apps, so there
is not a single repository of the information.
8:19:26 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked whether there is a central state
repository, and how to make sure firefighters are protected in
the event that one of the apps stops functioning.
8:20:10 AM
LORI WING-HEIER, Director, Division of Insurance, Department of
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, responded that if
the firefighters are all using individual apps, and there's not
a central repository for the information, she wouldn't be able
to answer the question. If firefighters use the app of their
choice and the data is somehow lost, she said, there would be no
way of accessing the records.
8:21:03 AM
CHARLES COLLINS, Director, Division of Workers' Compensation,
Department of Labor and Workforce Development, said that there's
no tracking of which he is aware. He said that it's the
responsibility of each individual firefighter to track
exposures.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS commented that it seems like a structural
weakness. He asked Ms. Wing-Heier whether he's "wrong" to be
worried.
8:21:30 AM
MS. WING-HEIER replied, "It would seem to me that, perhaps, the
fire departments are keeping a track of what they were exposed
to, for all their members, that perhaps the individual could
then rely on." She expressed that the lack of tracking appears
to be a weakness within the system.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS suggested checking with the municipal fire
department in Anchorage.
8:22:15 AM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ commented that if the responsibility for
tracking exposure lies with the firefighter, the current system
is problematic.
8:23:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked how workers' compensation claims for
cancers have been handled in the past.
MR. COLLINS replied that there have been five cancer-related
workers' compensation claims since 2016. He said that the
Division of Workers' Compensation doesn't track medical records.
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked what the outcomes were in the
claims.
MR. COLLINS responded that four claims were paid, and one person
was deceased. He said the Division of Workers' Compensation
tracks the costs for benefits, and outcomes are sometimes not
shared.
8:25:49 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked whether hereditary factors have been used
as an excuse to not cover someone.
MR. COLLINS replied, "Yes ... that's a very common argument for
the employer's attorney or carrier's attorney." He said
hereditary factors and tobacco use are both used as arguments
against coverage.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS discussed the possibility of considering
narrowing the consideration of hereditary factors. He then
asked Ms. Wing-Heier whether the Division of Insurance has
experienced issues.
8:27:02 AM
MS. WING-HEIER said that the Division of Insurance has the
responsibility of overseeing policies and rates, while the
Division of Workers' Compensation works with individual claims
and how the system works for an injured employee.
8:27:25 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked Mr. Collins study whether hereditary
factors have been used to deny workers' compensation.
[HB 204 was held over.]
^PRESENTATION(S): State & Local Workers' Rights Enforcement
PRESENTATION(S): State & Local Workers' Rights Enforcement
8:27:56 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would
be a presentation on State & Local Workers' Rights Enforcement.
8:28:34 AM
TERRI GERSTEIN, Director, State and Local Enforcement Project,
Harvard Law School Labor and Worklife Program, shared that she
is a Senior Fellow at the Economic Policy Institute and
previously worked for 17 years enforcing workforce laws in the
New York State Attorney General's office. She introduced her
PowerPoint presentation [hard copy included in the committee
packet], "State and Local Workers' Rights Innovations: New
Players, New Laws, New Methods of Enforcement," and presented
slide 2, "Roadmap," which began as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
? The landscape for workers
? States & localities
New Players
New Laws
New Methods of Enforcement
? Why do we still need state & local action
MS. GERSTEIN presented slide 3, "The landscape for workers,"
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
? Wage stagnation
? Declining union density
? Widespread retaliation for organizing unions
? Under-resourced enforcement agencies
? Forced arbitration (no access to judge and jury)
? Growing chasm between corporate & worker power
MS. GERSTEIN pointed out that nationwide union membership is
currently approximately 6 percent, which is the same as it was
in 1993 at the inception of the New Deal. She said that there
is widespread retaliation against workers who try to organize
unions; enforcement agencies at every level of government are
under-resourced, and many state agencies don't have any wage and
hour investigators. She said that workers are increasingly
required to enter into arbitration, with the arbitrator on the
employer's payroll, and the record of such proceedings is not
made public. A study by New York University found that hundreds
of thousands of claims every year are not heard, due to forced
arbitration, extinguishing approximately 98 percent of claims.
The concentration of corporate power, she said, negatively
affects workers.
8:34:14 AM
MS. GERSTEIN presented slide 4, "The landscape for workers,"
which continued the subject from slide 3 and which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
? Fissuring of the workplace (subcontracting,
franchising, misclassification of workers, etc. to
avoid employer status)
? Past four years: rollbacks of workers' rights, less
aggressive enforcement by federal administration
? Now: worldwide pandemic w/ workplace transmission
? All disproportionately impact immigrant workers,
Black workers, other workers of color, women.
MS. GERSTEIN presented slide 5, "States and localities," and she
said that new key individuals, new laws, and new methods of
enforcement have developed within the past several years. She
presented slide 6, "New Players," which listed state attorneys
general (AGs), district attorneys (DAs), and municipalities.
She said that state AGs have not historically been involved in
enforcing workers' rights, and as recently as 2015, only New
York, Massachusetts, and California had AGs who addressed
workers' rights issues. Since then, she said, state AGs have
become more involved in workers' rights, and 10 states have
established dedicated labor or worker protection units.
District attorneys have also not been historically involved in
workers' rights, she said. If a worker stole from an employer,
a DA would pursue criminal charges against the worker; if an
employer commits wage theft, however, the act would be treated
civilly instead of criminally. So far, she said, only egregious
instances of worker mistreatment have been addressed, such as
worker trafficking, payroll fraud, cheating on unemployment
taxes, or significant safety and health violations. She noted
that such cases are often revenue-generating. Municipalities
have gotten involved in workers' rights by passing laws, setting
up city labor standards offices, and establishing outreach. In
Philadelphia, she said, there was a ballot initiative to amend
the city charter and create a city labor department, which was
approved with approximately 80 percent of the vote.
8:39:57 AM
MS. GERSTEIN presented slide 7, "New laws," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Higher minimum wage or broader overtime coverage
Paid sick and family leave
Collective bargaining (excluded workers: public
employees, farmworkers)
"Gig economy" worker protections
Fair scheduling
Non-compete reform
Just-cause termination
Anti-retaliation laws
Covid-specific protections
MS. GERSTEIN said that in 2020, 24 states and 48 localities had
minimum wage increases, and a couple of states passed laws
requiring broader coverage for overtime for the "white collar
exemption." Some states strengthened the criminal statutes for
wage theft, raising them from misdemeanor offenses to felony
offenses for wage theft of over a certain amount. Paid sick and
family leave laws are now established in 13 states and 21
localities. Collective bargaining is an area that is generally
under the purview of the federal government, she said, but some
states have established laws creating collective bargaining
rights for workers excluded under federal law, such as public
employees and farm workers. She noted the existence of
provisions allowing the government to consider a company's
employment history in matters such as awarding government
contracts or issuing licenses or permits. She also noted that
some states and localities have established protections for
particular industries such as the "gig economy" or temporary
workers. Laws have been enacted requiring panic buttons for
hotel workers who are in danger, she said, and establishing
rights for domestic workers.
8:45:01 AM
MS. GERSTEIN continued the discussion of new laws, explaining
that non-compete agreements require workers to give up the right
to work for a competitor, and used to be for only high-level
employees such as those with access to trade secrets or
confidential information. Increasingly, she said, the
agreements are used indiscriminately, and many low-wage workers
are now subject to non-compete agreements; as such, many states
have passed laws curbing such contracts. She said that non-
compete agreements have been shown to reduce job mobility,
suppress wages, and reduce entrepreneurialism, meaning that
they're not good for the economy. Laws regarding protections
specifically due to COVID-19, she said, have also been
established.
MS. GERSTEIN presented slide 8, "New methods of enforcement,"
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Strategic enforcement
Community partnerships
Criminal prosecution
Government contracting consequences
Licensing/permitting consequences
Use of media to drive compliance
MS. GERSTEIN explained that the strategic enforcement model
focuses on driving employer compliance with the laws to deter
violations, instead of relying on complaint and investigation
mechanisms. She said that it's a proactive approach that
focuses on problematic industries and works closely with the
community in order to have the greatest impact. Using media to
drive compliance has been particularly effective, she said,
commenting that a Duke University professor found a significant
deterring impact on employers that had violations outlined in
press releases.
8:50:04 AM
MS. GERSTEIN presented slide 9, "Why do we still need state &
local action now?", which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
? Laboratories of experimentation
? Ability to respond to local conditions
? Forced arbitration, so need more public agencies
? In some places, more favorable state judiciary
MS. GERSTEIN said that laws established at the state and local
level, once piloted, can be scaled up to the federal level; paid
sick leave was originally passed in San Francisco, then a few
other cities, before being passed statewide and now being
discussed at the federal level. She then presented slide 10,
continuing the list from slide 9, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
? Scale of the crisis; need for all hands on deck
? Value of multiple levels of government protecting
working people
8:53:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked for more information on non-compete
agreements as they pertain to employees gaining access to
confidential information and using it to open their own
businesses.
MS. GERSTEIN responded that various laws have been passed that
are used to address such a situation; non-solicitation or
confidentiality agreements can be used to protect proprietary
information without preventing someone from having a livelihood
in their field of experience.
8:56:18 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS commented on the issue of non-compete clauses
being used against employees of Jimmy John's sandwich shop. He
pointed out that non-compete agreements were originally used in
highly technical jobs but are now being against on low-wage
workers.
MS. GERSTEIN said that the "Jimmy John's case" was one she
worked on in the New York Attorney General's Office. She
confirmed that non-compete agreements were originally used for
very high-level executives and were individually negotiated upon
hire; they're now being used much more broadly and are not
negotiated. She said that it's become common for companies to
require non-compete agreements from everyone from executives to
janitors, pointing out cases involving jobs ranging from check-
cashing clerks to phlebotomists. She said, "You can see how the
wage suppression would follow," pointing out that if the ability
to get another job is taken away, then the ability to negotiate
for a higher wage is taken away. She said that recently-passed
legislation in Illinois prohibited non-compete agreements only
for very low-wage workers.
9:00:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY shared an anecdote in which a person in
his profession was prohibited by a non-compete agreement from
competing within the state of Alaska, which he characterized as
"extreme." He again expressed concern at the possibility of
employees "stealing the manual" and opening up their own
businesses.
MS. GERSETIN shared the existence of the Uniform Laws
Commission, a nonpartisan body of lawyers that drafts model laws
for adoption, and is currently working on a model law for non-
compete reform. She then reiterated her earlier explanation
that there are ways in which a business may protect itself that
don't prevent a former employee from earning a living.
9:03:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY shared some of his suppositions about the
minimum wage increase in Seattle. He then discussed housing
costs in proportion to wages.
MS. GERSTEIN responded that housing is a critical need, and the
cost of housing needs to be addressed. She stated that
economists agree that minimum wage increases do not, in
practice, decrease employment. She pointed out that
jurisdictions that adopted a $15 minimum wage implemented the
increase incrementally, giving employers ample opportunity to
adjust operations. She pointed out that workers who are in
"tipped" positions can be paid $2.13 per hour, and that several
states have eliminated that provision; many restaurants are
paying workers a living wage instead of allowing tips.
9:09:08 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS shared that the U.S. Secretary of Labor
expressing that he was in favor of criminal prosecution of wage
theft, because overall compliance with the law would increase
after a couple of convictions. He asked whether Ms. Gerstein
believes the data will eventually reflect that type of
efficiency. He then asked whether states must change their
statutes to require strategic enforcement, or whether
enforcement can be done at the administrative level.
MS. GERSTEIN responded that she doesn't know of any academic
research assessing the impact of criminal versus civil
enforcement, but that her anecdotal experience is that criminal
enforcement has a strong deterrent impact. She expressed that
media coverage of the prosecutions would "move the dial." In
terms of strategic enforcement, she said, some state labor
departments are set up in a way that requires strategic
enforcement; New York has a task force to focus on proactive
enforcement in very low-wage industries, as well as a division
to handle complaints. She said that enforcement has often been
based on the administration in place.
9:13:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY again addressed his concerns about
employees stealing proprietary information and using it to start
businesses, and he asked Ms. Gerstein her thoughts on the
matter.
MS. GERSTEIN replied, "That's why we have trade secret law, and
that's why ... an employment contract, even if it doesn't have a
non-compete, it can have confidentiality requirements, and the
employer can go to court and sue if the person leaves the job
and violates the confidentiality requirements." She reiterated
her earlier statement that there are ways of addressing such
issues that don't block a person from being able to get a job.
9:16:13 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:16 a.m. to 9:17 a.m.
HB 91-CONTROLLED SUB. DATA: EXEMPT VETERINARIAN
9:17:16 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 91, "An Act exempting veterinarians from the
requirements of the controlled substance prescription database."
9:17:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ADAM WOOL, Alaska State Legislature, introduced
HB 91 as prime sponsor. He explained that the Prescription Drug
Monitoring Program (PDMP) is a nationwide program that mandates
health care professions enter patient information into a
database to track possible opioid abuse. Currently, he said,
veterinarians are required to participate in PDMP; the proposed
legislation would exempt veterinarians from required
participation. When a veterinarian or vet tech enters a pet
owner's information into the PDMP database, he said, he or she
then has complete information on what medication the pet owner
is taking. He said that the interface isn't set up for
veterinarians or pets, so violations are more likely, which
trigger investigations that cost money and time.
9:22:59 AM
ASHLEY CARRICK, Staff, Representative Adam Wool, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Wool, prime sponsor,
presented a PowerPoint titled, "HB 91: VETERINARIAN EXEMPTION
FROM PDMP [hardcopy included in the committee packet]. She
began the presentation with slide 2, "BACKGROUND: THE PDMP
PROGRAM," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Upsilon1 PDMP: Prescription Drug Monitoring Program
Upsilon1 Alaska's PDMP was established by SB 196 in 2008
Upsilon1 In reaction to growing opioid epidemic, the PDMP was
amended in 2017 via HB 159 from Governor Walker to
include veterinary participation requirements
Upsilon1 PDMP reporting is required for all actively licensed
practitioners who hold a Federal Drug Enforcement
Agency registration number and who dispense federally
scheduled II-IV controlled substances in the state
MS. CARRICK presented slide 3, "BACKGROUND: PREVIOUS VERSION OF
HB 91," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
HB 184 was introduced by Rep. Tammie Wilson in the
previous Legislature; later carried by Rep. Dave
Talerico
? Had a hearing in HSS prior to adjournment of the
2020 session due to COVID
? A petition of support for veterinary PDMP exemptions
gained over 1,000 Alaskan signatures of support
? AK Veterinary Medical Association (AKVMA), the Board
of Veterinary Examiners (BOVE), and veterinary
practices across the state remain in strong support
MS. CARRICK presented slide 4, "VET SHOPPING: IS THIS A
PROBLEM?", which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
? Vet shopping is the practice of soliciting
veterinarians for prescription medications
? A 2014 review of Prescription Monitoring Drug
Programs found less than 10 veterinary shoppers
nationwide
There have been no identified cases of veterinary
shopping in Alaska
? There is a natural barrier to vet shopping since
costs for veterinary care are paid up front by the pet
owner
9:27:15 AM
MS. CARRICK presented slide 5, "STATE BY STATE COMPARISON ON
PDMP REPORTING," which showed a map of the United States with 34
states highlighted in red, and which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
? 34 states (shown in red) do not require a dispensing
veterinary practice to report to the state PDMP
? West Virginia just passed legislation
? Currently, Illinois is considering legislation to
exempt vets
MS. CARRICK presented slide 6, "GOALS OF HB 91," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
ALLOWS THE PDMP TO WORK AS DESIGNED TO COMBAT HUMAN
OPIOID ABUSE
REFLECTS CURRENT OPIOID PRESCRIPTION REALTIES FOR
VETERINARY PRACTICE
PROTECTS THE PRIVACY OF HUMAN PATIENTS AND REDUCES
COSTS OF VETERINARY CARE
MS. CARRICK presented slide 7, "GOAL #1: ALLOW THE PDMP TO WORK
AS DESIGNED," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
The PDMP is designed to combat human opioid abuse,
HOWEVER:
Upsilon1 Unlike humans, animals do not have a unique
identifier or human owner
Upsilon1 Unlike humans, animals can change names, birthdays,
or ownership
Upsilon1 There is no Medicaid for animals and owners pay up
front for each visit
Upsilon1 Veterinary data in the PDMP is not easily
interpreted and can complicate effective use of the
PDMP for all participants
Upsilon1 Veterinarians are not trained in human medication-
including timing and dosage amounts
Upsilon1 Animals cannot falsely represent pain or injuries
that may require opioids
9:29:56 AM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked for clarification on what types of
drugs are required to be reported in PDMP.
9:30:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL responded that PDMP allows a veterinarian of
staff access to the data regarding controlled substances that
are prescribed. He said that Xanax, Valium, behavioral health
drugs, and certain drugs to treat addicts are all controlled
substances. He said that commonly-prescribed drugs would be in
the database and accessible by a veterinarian.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ suggested that it's important to
clarify that medications such as insulin or heart medication
would not be in the PDMP database.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL agreed that only certain controlled
substances are included in the database.
9:32:59 AM
MS. CARRICK resumed the PowerPoint presentation on HB 91 with
slide 8, "GOAL #2: REFLECT CURRENT OPIOID PRESCRIPTION
REALITIES," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Veterinarians can prescribe opioids to their animal
patients, HOWEVER:
Upsilon1 Opioid medications prescribed by veterinarians
represented only 0.34% of total opioid prescriptions
in 2017
Upsilon1 The drugs contributing to the opioid crisis are not
the drugs used most often in veterinary medicine
Upsilon1 Animal doses cannot be standardized in Morphine
Milligram Equivalents (MME's) the same as human
medications
9:34:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER discussed the statistic of opioid
medications representing 0.34 percent of total opioid
prescriptions in 2017, and she recalled testimony that the
requirement to enter opioid medications into the database was
encouraging veterinarians to prescribe fewer opioids. She asked
whether the low percentage could be the result of the
requirement.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL responded that he doesn't know the trend,
but 34 states don't require PDMP database records of opioid
prescriptions by veterinarians.
9:35:48 AM
MS. CARRICK resumed the PowerPoint with slide 9, "GOAL #3:
PROTECT PRIVACY AND REDUCE COSTS OF CARE," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
There are human privacy concerns related to
participation in the PDMP program, SUCH AS:
Upsilon1 In order to prescribe or dispense a controlled
substance to an animal, an owner's medical information
must be queried
Upsilon1 Most owners are unaware that their own prescription
information is available to their veterinarian
Upsilon1 Some of the drugs prescribed to human patients that
can be viewed by veterinarians include:
Upsilon1 Hormones
Upsilon1 Behavioral health medications
Upsilon1 Steroids
Upsilon1 Substance abuse treatment medications
MS. CARRICK presented slide 11, "ALTERNATIVES TO MANDATORY
VETERINARY PARTICIPATION IN PDMP," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Upsilon1 Continued education for veterinarians on avoiding
opioid prescription misuse
Upsilon1 Research on the prevalence of veterinary shopping
and its relation to the opioid epidemic
Upsilon1 Appropriate outreach to DEA officials if there is
suspected diversion of controlled substances, which is
currently required in Federal law
9:38:31 AM
RACHEL BERNGARTT, DVM, Chair, Board of Veterinary Examiners,
testified in support of HB 91. She shared that she has been a
veterinarian in Alaska for 19 years and is a member of the
Alaska Bar Association. She said that the statistic of 0.34
percent referred to earlier was from a 2017 study; however, the
data is consistent with subsequent years. Over $40,000 was
spent on investigations in the first half of fiscal year 2021,
she said, and expenditures are expected to double by the end of
the year compared to 2020. There were 56 open investigations
related to use of PDMP, she said, which appear to be related to
using a "non-usable" system instead of to illicit prescribing.
Open investigations are usually in the single digits, and
investigations are paid for by the board and funded solely by
licensees; Alaska has one of the most expensive veterinary
licenses in the country, she said, and the cost is expected to
increase again due to the investigation costs. Increased
licensing fees, she said, would exacerbate Alaska's veterinary
shortage.
DR. BERNGARTT explained that because veterinary records aren't
standardized across the profession, there's no program that
interfaces with them. She addressed the opposition to HB 91 by
the American College of Emergency Physicians, which stated that
the risks for misuse would increase if animal clinics were
granted an exemption; there is no support for such a statement,
she said. So-called "doctor shopping" in veterinary medicine is
virtually nonexistent, she said, due to veterinary medicine
commonly requiring up-front payments. She expressed agreement
that addressing the opioid crisis is important, but she said
that requiring veterinarians to use the PDMP database is not the
way to address it.
9:44:03 AM
MARY ANN HOLLICK, DVM, Alaska Veterinary Medical Association,
testified in support of HB 91. She stressed that drugs are
locked up until needed for surgery, that she has not experienced
a human client exhibiting drug-seeking behavior in her 33 years
as a veterinarian, and that the PDMP database has human health
care implications, not veterinary ones. She said that the pain
reliever most used by veterinarians is non-steroidal anti-
inflammatory medication, similar to Advil or Tylenol. There is
no way to track the personal history for an animal, she said,
and her human clients are often upset when asked for a driver's
license or birthday. Veterinarians and staff are educated on
opioid abuse, she said, and veterinarian participation in PDMP
does nothing to reduce the risk for opioid abuse.
9:48:26 AM
MCKAYLA DICK, DVM, President, Alaska Veterinary Medical
Association, testified in support of HB 91. She said that as
health care providers, AKVMA recognizes its responsibility in
contributing to the opioid crisis; however, after years of
participating in PDMP, it's clear that the program is unfit for
veterinary medicine. Designed as a tool to identify duplicate
prescriptions and trends in human medicine, PDMP is
inappropriate for veterinarian use because animals can't fake
illness. In 2014, a nationwide study by Lincoln Memorial
University showed less than 10 cases of drug-shopping in
veterinary medicine within PDMP, she said, and for a pet to be
prescribed a controlled medication, a client must pay up-front
for all services, which can begin at $600. Humans have
identifiers such as birthdays, driver's license numbers, and
social security numbers, she said, while animals don't, so
querying the database for pet patients isn't possible.
Veterinarians who have used the database have found that it
doesn't contain prescription history, even when querying the
human client whose pet has previously been prescribed
medications; the data is lost or not being used. She said PDMP
is a "true invasion of privacy" because it allows veterinarians,
who are untrained in human medicine, to evaluate the medications
of their clients. She said veterinarians are not choosing to
practice in Alaska due in part to high fees, which are
exacerbated by investigations stemming from the use of PDMP.
Allowing PDMP to be used for its intended purpose, she said,
would eliminate an unnecessary burden on veterinarians.
9:54:05 AM
PAM VENTGEN, Executive Director, Alaska State Medical
Association, testified in opposition to HB 91. She said that
opioid abuse is a challenge in Alaska and people with addictions
will go to "great lengths" to feed the addiction. She offered
anecdotes of "bad actors" in human medicine who were caught
illegally overprescribing controlled substances, and she shared
a story of speaking to people who said they have knowledge of
addicts abusing veterinarian-prescribed medication, pointing out
that one person who was in addiction treatment said that there
was a veterinarian also in treatment. She said only licensed
personnel are able to access the database. She said, "If the
PDMP is the problem, we should fix the PDMP, not exempt
prescribers and dispensers."
9:58:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether there have been efforts to
modify PDMP or reporting practices to better serve the needs of
veterinarians.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL responded that PDMP is a nationwide program,
and that he questions the veracity of accusations regarding
problems relating to veterinarians, since 34 states have either
never required veterinarians to use it or have exempted them
from the requirement.
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER clarified her question.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL deferred to one of the invited testifiers.
9:59:59 AM
DR. BERNGARTT offered that the issue has been discussed within
the regulatory policy task force of the American Association of
Veterinary State Boards. She said Wisconsin has received a
grant to study options for building a different system, but
other states are experiencing problems similar to Alaska's.
10:00:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN said his elderly dog had many
prescriptions, and that he didn't like his own name being
associated with his pet's medication. He referred to the
statistic of 0.34 percent of all opioids being prescribed by
veterinarians, and he asked whether there is any evidence to
support the anecdotes of abuse of veterinary medications.
DR. BERNGARTT said that the issue of a veterinarian in substance
abuse recovery is a different problem than those handled through
PDMP. "To say that veterinarians are completely immune to any
sort of substance abuse," she said, "that's a different topic
than what the PDMP does." She said that she assumes the
veterinarian's drug use was discovered through means other than
PDMP. She pointed out that the "bad actors" in medicine were
caught by the Drug Enforcement Agency, not PDMP. She said there
are many ways in which veterinarians can substantially
contribute to fighting the opioid crisis.
[HB 91 was held over.]
10:04:07 AM
ADJOURNMENT
The House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee recessed at
10:04 p.m. to the call of the chair.
12:30:47 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee back to order at 12:30 p.m. Present at the call back
to order were Representatives Fields, Spohnholz, Schrage,
McCarty, and Snyder. Representative Kaufman arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
[Due to technical difficulties, the first minute of the call
back to order was not captured in audio but was captured in the
secretary's log notes.]
SB 12-MILITARY SPOUSE COURTESY LICENSE
12:30:49 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the final order of business would
be SENATE BILL NO. 12, "An Act relating to temporary courtesy
licenses for military spouses; and relating to the Department of
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development."
12:30:50 PM
JOE HAYES, Staff, Senator Scott Kawasaki, Alaska State
Legislature, presented SB 12 on behalf of Senator Kawasaki,
prime sponsor. He read the sponsor statement, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
In 2011, House Bill 28 was passed into law to provide
expedited temporary courtesy licenses to eligible
individuals transferred to Alaska with their active
duty service member spouse, so they can practice their
trade without experiencing extensive wait times for
licensure approval while they complete state
requirements. For a military spouse, expedited
temporary courtesy licenses are the fastest method of
obtaining licensure so they can get to work quickly
after relocating to Alaska.
Many states have passed similar legislation into law.
However, states such as Washington and Connecticut
also included a reporting mechanism so the Legislature
and Joint Armed Services Committee equivalent in that
state could track the executive branch's progress of
implementation. HB 28 did not include a reporting
requirement when it was passed.
Senate Bill 12 would require the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development to
prepare an annual report of courtesy licenses issued
the previous fiscal year. This simple reporting
mechanism will help facilitate communication between
occupational boards, the state agency, the U.S.
Department of Defense who assists in relocating
service members and families, as well as Alaska
legislators with service members in their districts.
The bill will also aid in making occupational board
staff and legislators more aware of what opportunities
are available for helping military spouses enter the
Alaska the workforce.
Other states have implemented a similar expedited
licensing program to allow military spouses to
transfer their professional credentials quickly and
contribute to the local economies. While Alaska's
program is a model for other states, its
implementation has stalled with few eligible
professionals taking advantage of the program and
spouses reporting delays despite the program being in
effect for eight years. Senate Bill 12 would help
identify inefficiencies in the program before they
cause delays in productivity and ensure the program is
working as intended.
Introduced in 2018 as House Bill 262, the bill passed
the House unanimously and gained bipartisan support in
the Senate before it failed to reach the floor for a
vote. The concept of this bill is listed as a priority
for the U.S. Department of Defense by the state
liaison serving Alaska.
The passage of SB 12 would improve communication
between state and federal government agencies and
active duty families. By improving efficiency and
awareness about what opportunities are available, the
bill will help welcome military families to Alaska. I
respectfully urge your support of SB 12, a corrective
bill that will help ease the transition of military
families and get more licensed professionals to work
in our communities near military installations.
12:33:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked about existing reciprocity.
MR. HAYES responded that HB 28 had passed during the Twenty-
Seventh Alaska State Legislature, but the state had not been
monitoring its effects. This proposed legislation would require
an annual report regarding how many military spouses were able
to use their licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked when HB 28 passed.
MR. HAYES responded that HB 28 passed in 2011.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether the state had been denying
licensing to otherwise eligible individuals.
MR. HAYES said that, while no licenses had been denied, military
spouses were not aware of the program.
12:37:21 PM
TAMMIE PERREAULT, Northwest Regional Liaison, Defense-State
Liaison Office, U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), testified in
support of SB 12 on behalf of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Military Community & Family Policy. She said that
the proposed legislation would support significant DoD
priorities for occupational licensing boards to ensure licenses
are appropriately processed for military spouses. She expressed
that the reporting requirements under SB 12 would help DoD
assess the actions of licensing boards, as well as encourage any
appropriate implementation of changes to law and regulatory
policy. She said that the Defense-State Liaison Office, in a
2017 study done by the University of Minnesota, found specific
limitations to Alaska's current expedited licensure process such
as board staff not being aware of legislation that supports
licensure portability, lack of unique processes for military
spouses, and limited available information. Since 2017, she
said, the Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional
Licensing in the Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development (DCCED) has worked hard to address the shortcomings,
including significantly reducing the processing time for
military spouses. She expressed that without the appropriate
supporting legislation, continuing the effort to improve
Alaska's process for military spouse licensure could be
hindered; the concern has been communicated to the governor by
the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. She
said that half of all military personnel are married, and
military spouse employment and its associated personal and
financial well-being is a vital component in servicemember
retention, with 88 percent of military spouses reporting that
they either want or need to work. Military spouses are highly
influential regarding a servicemember's decision to remain in
the service, she said, and over 28 percent of servicemembers
reported that their decision to leave the military would
"largely or moderately" be affected by their spouse's career
prospects. Ms. Perrault noted that consideration of a spouse's
licensure is required when making "basing decisions," and she
stressed that military families often require two incomes.
12:39:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether temporary licenses for
active duty military members, rather than only for spouses,
could be considered.
MR. HAYES replied that he does not believe Senator Kawasaki
would be opposed to such consideration, but he doesn't know how
that would work.
12:41:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked about military spouses engaged in
internships or apprenticeships.
MR. HAYES responded that he doesn't believe the proposed
legislation would cover such individuals.
12:43:03 PM
SARA CHAMBERS, Director, Division of Corporations, Business, and
Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development, said that the proposed legislation doesn't
change anything in the licensing process, it would simply
require the annual report.
12:44:02 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked Representative McCarty whether the action
on the House floor addressed the issues he had sought to address
with a possible amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY replied yes.
12:44:20 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS opened public testimony on SB 12. After
ascertaining that no one wished to testify, he closed public
testimony.
12:44:41 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ moved to report SB 12 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, SB 12 was reported out of the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
12:45:22 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
12:45 p.m.