Legislature(2023 - 2024)BARNES 124
02/10/2023 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
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 | |
| HB29 | |
| HB51 | |
| HB13 | |
| HB46 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 29 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 46 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 51 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 29-INSURANCE DISCRIMINATION
3:16:10 PM
CHAIR SUMNER announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 29, "An Act relating to insurance
discrimination."
3:16:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MCCABE, Alaska State Representative, as
prime sponsor, presented HB 29. He stated insurance companies
discriminate based on certain risk factors for the purposes of
rate management and to incentivize certain risk reduction
measures. He continued that there are some limitations on the
types of discrimination that can be used by insurance companies.
He stated that HB 29 would add political expression,
affiliation, and status as an elected official to the list of
classes protected against discrimination by insurance companies.
3:19:12 PM
BUDDY WHITT, Staff, Representative Kevin McCabe, Alaska State
Legislature, provided the sectional analysis and sponsor
statement for HB 29 on behalf of Representative McCabe, prime
sponsor. He stated that Section 1 of HB 29 would amend AS 21.36
by adding a new section that would prohibit insurance brokers
from discriminating against people on the basis of their
political affiliation or expression or a person's status as an
elected official as defined in AS 44.99.205. He said that
Section 2 would amend uncodified law to provide effective dates
to insurance companies.
3:20:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if Representative McCabe had talked to
insurance providers about the provisions of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that some insurance providers
told him that they would not provide certain policies to elected
officials, including umbrella policies.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if there are any insurance companies
that will provide that specific coverage.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that some providers said they
would.
3:21:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if Representative McCabe had spoken
to any elected officials or other individuals that had been
denied coverage on the grounds covered by the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that he had spoken to several
elected officials on the state, municipal, and school board
levels that had been denied umbrella policies due to their
status as an elected official.
3:22:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RUFFRIDGE asked if there is a definition of
discrimination attached to the bill, and whether that would
cause the price of insurance to increase.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that it is possible for the bill
to cause prices to increase. He stated that he believes there
is a significant difference between discriminating against
someone because they won an election and discriminating against
someone because they received multiple traffic citations.
REPRESENTATIVE RUFFRIDGE asked if the reason for that change in
discrimination was a result of an assumed increase in risk for
the elected official.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that he had looked through
multiple actuaries but was unable to find one pertaining to the
risk of being a public official.
3:25:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked if any insurance providers
explicitly denied someone coverage because of their status as a
public official.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that he had spoken to elected
officials that told him that they had been denied umbrella
coverage due to their status as an elected official.
3:26:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if Greg Smith had anything to add to
the previous answers.
GREG SMITH, Legislative Liaison, Department of Commerce,
Community, and Economic Development, answered that insurance
companies have the ability to discriminate but not to
discriminate unfairly. He stated that he was unable to find the
protected classes in statute but understood that certain classes
such as race could not be used to discriminate. He added that
insurance companies sometimes discriminate against "people of
notoriety" due to an assumed level of increased risk.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX stated that umbrella coverage is excess
liability coverage, and while homeowner's insurance covers
slander and libel, the limit for it is lower. He asked if any
insurance providers would exclude someone from buying liability
coverage on a homeowner's policy because of their status as an
elected official.
MR. SMITH answered that he was unsure.
3:29:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RUFFRIDGE asked about the potential of liability
coverage from the special Department of Risk under the
Department of Administration.
MR. SMITH answered that he is unsure how the department works,
but that elected officials would be indemnified in certain
cases.
3:31:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked what definition of political
affiliation the bill would use and whether Representative McCabe
knew of anyone that had been denied coverage explicitly for
their political affiliation.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that he is unaware of any person
in Alaska that has been denied coverage on the grounds of their
political affiliation; he stated that the bill is modeled after
a similar bill in the state of Texas where there had been
incidents in which a person was denied coverage on those
grounds. He said that he would define political affiliation as
a party registration or stated political belief.
3:33:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if it was Representative McCabe's
intention to keep the political affiliation language in the
bill.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that he had looked at bills from
other states as models, stating that he believed the one from
Texas made the most sense. He said that he understands why an
insurance company would be able to discriminate based on
circumstances such as driving record; he continued that he does
not believe that should apply to political affiliation. He
stated that the possibility of losing umbrella coverage as a
result of being elected to an office is a barrier to people
wanting to run for office.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if there were any documents available
pertaining to the Texas bill that HB 29 is modeled after.
MR. WHITT answered that he would be able to retrieve those
documents, including a paper written by a PhD student at the
University of Texas detailing risk pools and discrimination
within those risk pools. He referenced a previous question
asked by Representative Ruffridge and stated that within certain
risk pools, there are certain classes that are still protected
against discrimination. He added that the bill would add a
section to Title 21 preventing discrimination based on political
affiliation and status as an elected official for insurance
coverage.
3:37:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that the definition of "elected
official" given in A.S. 44.99.205 includes only the Governor,
Lieutenant Governor, and members of the legislature, and asked
whether the bill could be improved by expanding the definition
to include local and school board officials.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE answered that he believes the bill can be
improved but was concerned about the scope going too far. He
stated his willingness to broaden the definition of elected
officials used by the bill in the future.
[HB 29 was held over.]