Legislature(1999 - 2000)
2000-03-30 House JournalFull Journal pdf
2000-03-30 House Journal Page 2790 HB 422 The following was read the second time: HOUSE BILL NO. 422 "An Act relating to workers' compensation benefits for injuries resulting from consumption of alcohol or use of drugs; and providing for an effective date." with the: Journal Page L&C RPT 4DP 2NR 2492 ZERO FISCAL NOTE (LABOR) 2493 2000-03-30 House Journal Page 2791 HB 422 Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representative Kemplen: Page 2, lines 3, 10, and 21, following "beverage": Insert "resulting in a blood-alcohol level of .04" Representative Kemplen moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. Representative James objected. HB 422 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HB 422 Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 12 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Berkowitz, Brice, Cissna, Croft, Davies, Grussendorf, Kemplen, Kerttula, Moses, Ogan, Sanders, Smalley Nays: Austerman, Bunde, Coghill, Cowdery, Davis, Dyson, Foster, Green, Halcro, Harris, Hudson, James, Joule, Kapsner, Kohring, Masek, Morgan, Mulder, Murkowski, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Therriault, Whitaker, Williams Excused: Barnes, Kookesh, Kott And so, Amendment No. 1 was not adopted. 2000-03-30 House Journal Page 2792 HB 422 Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Croft: Page 2, line 25: Insert new bill sections to read: "* Sec. 4. AS23.30.190(a) is amended to read: (a) In case of impairment partial in character but permanent in quality, and not resulting in permanent total disability, the compensation is $177,000 ¦$135,000á multiplied by the employees percentage of permanent impairment of the whole person. The percentage of permanent impairment of the whole person is the percentage of impairment to the particular body part, system, or function converted to the percentage of impairment to the whole person as provided under (b) of this section. The compensation is payable in a single lump sum, except as otherwise provided in AS23.30.041, but the compensation may not be discounted for any present value considerations. * Sec. 5. AS23.30.215(a) is amended to read: (a) If the injury causes death, the compensation is known as a death benefit and is payable in the following amounts to or for the benefit of the following persons: (1) reasonable and necessary funeral expenses not exceeding $3,300 ¦$2,500á; (2) if there is a widow or widower or a child or children of the deceased, the following percentages of the spendable weekly wages of the deceased: (A) 80 percent for the widow or widower with no children; (B) 50 ¦40á percent for the widow or widower with one child and 40 percent for the child; (C) 30 ¦25á percent for the widow or widower with two or more children and 70 ¦55á percent divided equally among the children; (D) 100 ¦80á percent for an only child when there is no widow or widower; (E) 100 ¦80á percent, divided equally, if there are two or more children and no widow or widower; (3) if the widow or widower remarries, the widow or widower is entitled to be paid in one sum an amount equal to the compensation to which the widow or widower would otherwise be entitled in the two years commencing on the date of remarriage as 2000-03-30 House Journal Page 2793 HB 422 full and final settlement of all sums due the widow or widower; (4) if there is no widow or widower or child or children, then for the support of father, mother, grandchildren, brothers and sisters, if dependent upon the deceased at the time of injury, 42 percent of the spendable weekly wage of the deceased to such beneficiaries, share and share alike, not to exceed $20,000 in the aggregate." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Representative Croft moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Rokeberg objected. Representative Rokeberg rose to a point of order stating that the amendment removed a section of another bill from committee and did not conform to the title. The Speaker ruled that latitude would be allowed and further amendments would be added to address title conformity if needed. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: HB 422 Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 15 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Berkowitz, Brice, Cissna, Cowdery, Croft, Davies, Grussendorf, Joule, Kapsner, Kemplen, Kerttula, Moses, Sanders, Smalley Nays: Bunde, Coghill, Davis, Dyson, Foster, Green, Halcro, Harris, Hudson, James, Kohring, Masek, Morgan, Mulder, Murkowski, Ogan, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Therriault, Whitaker, Williams 2000-03-30 House Journal Page 2794 HB 422 Excused: Barnes, Kookesh, Kott And so, Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. Amendment No. 3 was not offered. Representative Green moved and asked unanimous consent that HB422 be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading and placed on final passage. Representative Berkowitz objected. The Speaker stated that HB 422 will be in third reading on the March31, 2000, calendar.