Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/21/2005 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB187 | |
| HB13 | |
| HB231 | |
| HB31 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 187 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 231 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 53 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 31
"An Act relating to the presumption of coverage for a
workers' compensation claim for disability as a result
of certain diseases for certain occupations."
JON BITTNER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE TOM ANDERSON, read the
sponsor statement (copy on file.) He shared examples of the
dangers of being a firefighter and the increased likelihood
of contracting cancer. HB 31 provides presumption of
coverage for first responders and firefighter, shifting the
burden of proof from them to their employers. He referred
to a study in the committee members' packets, which showed
no significant fiscal impact in other states. He urged
support of the bill.
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked who this legislation covers. Mr.
Bittner replied that the intent of the sponsor is to cover
as many first responders as possible, but all firefighters.
There is a new presumption on page 2, line 27-8, which
states coverage for police officers and emergency rescue
personnel.
3:53:54 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT the new CS for HB 31,
labeled 24-LS0225\I. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so
ordered.
Mr. Bittner related two changes in the new CS. On page 2,
line 3, "cardiovascular events" replaces "heart disease".
On page 2, line 26, the firefighter has to prove exposure to
a know carcinogen.
3:56:14 PM
Representative Hawker stated full support for the intent of
the bill. He wondered about voluntary self-destructive
behavior. He referred to line 10, regarding a list of
evidence of such behavior and asked if that list is too
limited. Mr. Bittner noted that the list is specific to the
exclusions. Representative Weyhrauch pointed out that it
reads as a presumption of coverage and the burden of proof
is on the insurance company or municipality.
3:59:51 PM
Representative Hawker asked if the intent is to limit
coverage for these specific examples. Mr. Bittner related
that these are the specific issues mentioned when drafting
the bill. Representative Weyhrauch suggested the wording,
"the evidence may include but not be limited to".
Representative Hawker concurred with Representative
Weyhrauch, but noted that the list is very broad. Mr.
Bittner said one of the fears was to make it too broad.
Representative Weyhrauch gave an example of smoke inhaled on
another fire department job.
4:03:38 PM
Co-Chair Chenault agreed that the list is too wide and would
exclude many valid claims. Representative Kelly voiced
concern about the cost of workers' compensation. He pointed
out that most first responders are covered by OSHA.
4:06:12 PM
Representative Hawker concluded that he is comfortable with
the language.
4:06:46 PM
DOMINIC LOZANO, ALASKA FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, related
that HB 31 provides a much-needed safety net. He shared
statistics about the dangerous profession of firefighting.
Thirty-eight other states have this coverage. He gave
examples of claims filed involving cancer. He mentioned
studies regarding the higher incidence of cancer in
firefighters. He shared studies from various states. He
predicted that Alaska would have 1,000 claims a year. He
spoke in support of HB 31.
4:13:32 PM
ERIC TUOTT, ALASKA FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, testified in
support of HB 31. He addressed concerns brought up earlier.
He noted that the bill is modeled after Washington state's
law. He referred to the clause about tobacco products and
addressed a concern about numbers and screening for cancer.
He pointed out that coverage under Section C is only for
first responders, and the numbers would be limited. He
explained the criteria for qualifying for a claim.
4:18:27 PM
Mr. Tuott addressed a concern by Representative Kelly and
OSHA controls. He pointed out that public safety employees
do not have OSHA coverage. He referenced the contagious
disease portion of the bill. Holding an EMT license does
not qualify someone for this coverage.
4:20:48 PM
Mr. Tuott addressed why this legislation is needed. He
referred to page 1, line 9, where it states that the
presumption of coverage may be rebutted by preponderance of
the evidence. The language is restricted to first
responders and applies to claims that are already awarded.
He urged passage of the bill.
4:23:10 PM
KEVIN SMITH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE
JOINT INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, related concerns about rate
increases. He explained who is represented by workers
compensation and addressed complications of the program. He
pointed out that compensation for these diseases already
exists. He suggested that lifestyle is a factor in these
diseases. He said that a medical exam is costly and does
not preclude developing cancer later on. He came up with
the number 9,050 as the total number of firefighters that
would qualify for the coverage.
4:30:01 PM
Representative Croft asked who should have the burden of
proof. For example, he suggested it would be difficult to
know which contact led to AIDS. He opined that it is fair
to cover AIDS and the burden of proof should not be on the
first responder.
Mr. Smith responded that ideally it would be nice to provide
this coverage. He opined it is easier now to prove, but the
liability is unfunded. Representative Croft suggested that
first responders should be covered. Mr. Smith talked about
the expense of the worker's compensation system.
4:34:24 PM
Representative Kelly asked if the incidence is so low, how
would there be a 10-20 percent increase. Mr. Smith
explained that NCCI uses national figures. He spoke about
the expense of an individual claim.
4:36:18 PM
Representative Hawker moved to report CSSSHB 31 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal impact notes. There being NO OBJECTION,
it was so ordered.
CSSSHB 31 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" recommendation and with three fiscal impact
notes: zero note #1 CED, indeterminate note #2 ADM, and a
new indeterminate note by LWF.
ADJOURNMENT
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|