Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
03/29/2012 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB202 | |
| SCR16 | |
| HB319 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 202 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SCR 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 319 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 319-STUDY HEALTH EFFECTS OF AIRPORT SCREENING
3:44:11 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 319, "An Act requiring a study of the health
effects of airport security screening."
3:45:00 PM
ANNA WHITE, Staff, Representative Sharon Cissna, Alaska State
Legislature, paraphrased from the sponsor statement:
HB 319 requires the Department of Health and Social
Services to conduct a study to determine the health
consequences of the federal Transportation Security
Administration's (TSA) procedures in Alaska. The
study will indicate the physical, mental health and
emotional impacts on Alaskans who are traveling
through locations that require TSA procedures.
Many Alaskans who have traveled outside Alaska since
October 2010 have experienced full-body scanners and
invasive physical exams given by TSA in larger
airports throughout the United States. However,
starting in December of last year, body scanners were
installed at the international airports in Anchorage,
Fairbanks, Juneau and Ketchikan.
The software in these machines makes the image less
personal that those of older machines, but the
scanner's millimeter wavelength technology has drawn
health concern from some passengers, and there is
insufficient independent scientific verification to be
assured of their safety.
If a scanner detects anything irregular in the
person's body, or if a passenger refuses to be
scanned, TSA procedures call for a hands-on exam by a
TSA employee. People who have previously been
subjected to events, either from work, environmental,
medical treatment or physical assault related can be
re-traumatized by this type of touching.
Unfortunately, trauma is pervasive in Alaska.
Increase in physically invasive touch on a population
leading the nation in trauma of many kinds requires
study to assess the mental health impacts on Alaska's
population. The cost of those impacts also needs to
be examined.
In addition to emotional reactions, there is concern
for protecting the public health. Among these
concerns is the need for advanced health training of
TSA workers who touch private and possibly surgically
or otherwise injured body parts that may also have
communicable diseases. These issues are critical to
travel in Alaska. Alaskans not only travel eight
times more than the national average, and a study is
needed to critically assess the possible impacts of
TSA procedures on the mental, emotional and physical
health of Alaskans.
3:47:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SHARON CISSNA, Alaska State Legislature, declared
that Alaska had high levels of trauma, behavioral problems, and
domestic violence, and consequently, that many Alaskans were
more sensitive to being touched in an inappropriate way.
Reporting that the "pat downs" started in October 2010, she
declared these to be "a physical exam by someone who did not
know what they were doing, and it was beyond invasive." She
relayed that, after she had gone public with her reactions to
the use of a body scanner a few months later, she had received
about 1000 e-mails. Since that time, she stated that she had
received an additional 1000 e-mails, calls, and letters relating
personal stories of airport experiences. She said the vast
majority of the respondents had not reported their experiences
to TSA. She explained that the proposed bill would have the
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) conduct a study
of the impacts that occur [from airport screenings], and review
"health in a broader way than some people would." She professed
that this would identify the psychological trauma, especially to
those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, from the
airport screening. She explained that this re-traumatization
from the screenings could reverse any prior therapies for
trauma. She offered a personal experience. She declared that
the proposed study would clarify many questions. She spoke
about the confusion for children when watching their parents
being touched at the airport screenings "in the very way their
parents told them not to let anybody touch them." She declared
that Alaska already had to spend a large amount of money on
mental and physical health issues, and that airport screenings
brought up many of these issues. She described a physical
contact during an airport screening that was a health concern.
She offered her belief that the study [described in proposed HB
319] was necessary.
3:58:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK asked about her discussions with DHSS and if
there was a fiscal note for the proposed bill.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA directed attention to the attached fiscal
note [Included in members' packets]. She agreed that although
it was not a small amount, DHSS had forecast the need for three
studies.
3:59:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that the fiscal note was for
$640,000 in each of FY13 and FY 14.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA said that the proposed bill would also
address some of the governor's concerns. She shared that when
she had asked TSA for a study, they had instead responded to the
governor with an "outline [of] the job they're doing, but with
no numbers or any real study."
4:00:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK asked if there had been a nationwide study.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA, in response, said that she had not found
any of this information. She declared that there was no
oversight on TSA, and that states did not have the power to
change TSA, as it was a federal entity. She expressed her
concern that the State of Alaska would be financially
accountable for the outcome of these airport screenings,
especially for any problems related to re-traumatization.
4:02:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether the proposed study should
concentrate on the newer screening systems, instead of including
the older systems.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA suggested that there would be different
effects from each type of technology, and she questioned the
safety and consequences from each type. She shared the TSA
claim that the scanner was safer than the flight, and she
reported that her next study would be on the dangers of flight.
She offered her belief that the new scanners were more X-ray
like, and could be more damaging to anyone with potential
cancers on body surfaces. She expressed her desire to find that
other studies were available. She opined that studies were not
conducted because of "what feels like political issues."
4:06:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, directing attention to page 1, line 7, of
the proposed bill, asked to clarify the intent of the study;
whether the bill was attempting to establish a percentage of
traumatized people, or to find out if these traumas did exist.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA replied that she wanted to ensure that
Alaska airports were given the freedom to change the security
process which was "inflicted on our passengers," so that
passengers were touched in ways that were respectful and safe.
She declared that the State of Alaska needed to be responsible
for the money spent on health care, "to fight to make sure that
we bring the cost down," and to demand to be reimbursed for the
costs that arise from federal decisions.
4:10:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA, offering her belief that the federal
government should do this study, opined that the proposed fiscal
note would not allow the proposed bill to pass. She suggested
inserting "(E) post-traumatic stress disorder" on page 1, after
line 13.
4:11:37 PM
MARILYN GUTTENBERG declared that there was physical and
psychological harm from repeated use of the screening machines,
as the machines were not calibrated. She described a personal
experience.
DIANE SCHENKER, Co-Director, Alaskans' Freedom to Travel USA,
said that she had spent at least one day each week at the
Anchorage Airport interviewing travelers since the scanners were
installed in December 2011. She declared that the scanners had
many false alarms; hence, the screeners would pat down and touch
the passengers. She relayed some of the passenger stories of
invasive pat downs by screeners. She commented on the possible
health consequences from searches of luggage, as passengers no
longer had any control over their luggage. She stated that, as
some people would no longer travel by plane, there were
unintended health consequences.
4:18:49 PM
PATRICIA ANDERSON, Co-Director, Alaskans' Freedom to Travel USA,
stated that she had been groped 5 times in the last 16 months,
and she had cancelled two other flights because she did not want
to be touched again. She declared that she now refused to go
through the scanners, as she was not assured to the safety of
these scanners. She discussed some of her personal experiences
with TSA and her concerns with her perceived lack of sanitation
by TSA, revealing that she did want to do anything that could
compromise her well-being. She stated that flying was very
stressful. She expressed her concern for the well-being of her
daughter, and that she had attempted to limit both of their
exposures to x-rays. She declared the need for an immediate,
independent, published study.
4:23:17 PM
JOE MCLAUGHLIN, MD, MPH, Chief and State Epidemiologist, Section
of Epidemiology, Division of Public Health, Department of Health
and Social Services, stated that the administration had no
position on the proposed bill. He declared that proposed HB 319
would require DHSS to investigate the varied health effects of
airport screening in general. He noted that it would be
necessary to evaluate the potential for psychological trauma and
physical effect from airport screening to travelers. He
declared that passage of HB 319 would necessitate that DHSS
contract with one or more outside agencies to perform the
studies. He offered his belief that this would require several
separate studies, including behavioral health, radiologic, and
toxicologic studies. Each of these studies would require the
development of a study protocol, review by an institutional
review board, and two years for the implementation and write up.
He declared that the studies would be very expensive, a
challenge to successfully implement, and a substantial increase
to the current DHSS workload.
4:25:54 PM
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony.
4:26:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK asked Representative Cissna if the proposed
bill would be a good investment of the funds and effective in
repealing the actions of TSA.
4:27:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA offered her belief that many actions had
occurred without a full study to the consequences. She opined
that the screenings at airports would change our culture. She
shared that officials from TSA had suggested a curricula for
children to better understand the pat downs at airports. She
declared that federal and state constitutional rights had been
lost. She suggested that the federal government should be sued.
She declared that proposed HB 319 was an effort to gather the
information.
4:31:36 PM
CHAIR KELLER declared that HB 319 would be held over.