Legislature(2015 - 2016)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/29/2016 01:30 PM Senate 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 | |
| Confirmation Hearings | |
| SB206 | |
| SB55 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | SB 206 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 55 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 55-OPTOMETRY & OPTOMETRISTS
2:42:01 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO announced the consideration of SB 55. She noted
this is the second hearing and the intent is to continue public
testimony.
2:42:55 PM
DR. MIKE BENNETT, OD, Alaska Optometric Association (AOA),
testified in support of SB 55. He provided his education and
work history. He said there have been a lot of fairy tales about
what the bill would do and they are not accurate. He countered
the notion that the AOA board would authorize untrained
procedures should the bill pass. He pointed out that self-
regulating boards have a long history of success and their
primary charge is to protect the public. There is no hidden
agenda.
2:45:46 PM
BOB PALMER, State Affairs Policy Director, American Academy of
Ophthalmology, testified in opposition to SB 55. He focused on
policy issues, especially the language in the bill regarding
surgery, which leaves open what is acceptable. He believes
optometrists would be able to perform several hundred additional
surgical procedures, which is unacceptable. He suggested
defining what constitutes surgery and then back out what should
not be included.
He discussed how other states have addressed this issue. He
concluded that defining surgery protects the patient.
2:50:27 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked where he is from.
MR. PALMER said Washington D.C.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if his organization paid for movie, radio,
and TV ads, robocalls, and mailings.
MR. PALMER said no. They gave the Alaska Society of Eye
Physicians and Surgeons a grant of about $50,000.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked him to provide the specific information to
the committee.
2:51:55 PM
PAUL MARKS, representing himself, testified in opposition to SB
55. He shared a personal experience with optometrists and said
he doesn't support an optometrist doing surgery when he isn't
qualified to do so.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if an optometrist did surgery on his eye.
MR. MARKS answered no; he went to Anchorage.
SENATOR GIESSEL restated that the optometrist did not perform
surgery.
2:55:53 PM
DR. GRIFFITH STEINER, MD, testified in opposition to SB 55. He
provided his professional education and practice as an eye
surgeon. He described this bill as specifically designed to
expand the scope of practice for optometrists. It allows for
injections around the eye and the right to do laser surgery. He
maintained that they will not have enough training to do those
procedures.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if the State Medical Board has a list of
surgeries that he can perform.
DR. STEINER said no, because physicians have medical training.
SENATOR GIESSEL emphasized that the bill does not contain a list
that defines what the Board of Medicine can authorize. She asked
if his authorization is based on his education, which is
determined by the board.
DR. STEINER said yes; however, a medical board is different than
an optometry board, because the medical board represents people
that are trained in medicine and surgery, with many more years
of training.
SENATOR GIESSEL said optometrists are not asking for an
expansion of practice.
DR. STEINER disagreed.
2:59:55 PM
MICHEAL GUZMAN, representing himself, testified in opposition to
SB 55. He offered his understanding that the bill would allow an
optometrist to perform eye surgery and prescribe narcotics and
he does not support that.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked who told him those things.
MR. GUZMAN said he read it online and heard it on the radio. He
said he also researched the bill.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if he is aware that optometrists have been
allowed to prescribe narcotics for nine years.
MR. GUZMAN said he wasn't aware of that. He asked if they can
prescribe to the same degree.
SENATOR GIESSEL said it may help if he was aware that many of
the courses optometrists take are taught by the same instructors
as ophthalmologists and they both obtain the same DEA
authorization.
3:02:41 PM
MATTHEW GLYNN, representing himself, testified in opposition to
SB 55. He shared his story of wanting laser surgery and only
finding he wasn't a candidate when he visited an
ophthalmologist.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if any of the optometrists performed
surgery.
MR. GLYNN answered no.
3:04:36 PM
TIM SMITH, representing himself, testified in opposition to SB
55. He spoke as a medical professional who was not in favor of
cross training in different modalities for licensure.
3:05:38 PM
EDDY IVIZARY, representing himself, testified in opposition to
SB 55. He said that he feels that only a qualified surgeon
should be able to operate on eyes. He shared his personal story.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked who told him that optometrists would be
doing eye surgery.
MR. IVIZARY restated his personal story and the importance of
being able to see.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if an optometrist had ever done surgery or
put a needle in his eye.
MR. IVIZARY said yes and he told him to stop.
3:08:28 PM
DR. MICHAEL BRENNAN, Ophthalmologist, Alaska Ophthalmology
Society, testified in opposition to SB 55. He shared his
professional background. He maintained that the bill endangers
the health of the citizens of Alaska. The bill has two inherent
flaws; the brevity in the education and training required to
manage complex medical and surgical conditions, and second, the
vague language regarding penetrative surgery. He also addressed
the over-prescribing of potent pharmaceuticals.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked how much money the society has invested in
ads opposing the bill.
DR. BRENNAN said the organization invests in a wide variety of
advocacy activities in order to provide patient safety. He said
he has not made a direct contribution to those ads. He did not
know how much the organization spent.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if he is aware that optometry has been
prescribing controlled substances for nine years.
DR. BRENNAN said they don't for for schedule IA and schedule IIA
drugs. He said the bill expands the pharmaceutical array.
SENATOR GIESSEL said the bill doesn't say that.
3:15:28 PM
At ease
3:16:08 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO reconvened the meeting.
3:16:49 PM
LUCRETIA ANN DEMIS, representing herself, testified in
opposition to SB 55. She doesn't think that optometrists should
be authorized to do the same surgical procedures as an
ophthalmologist. She said they don't have enough training or
background.
SENATOR GIESSEL pointed out that an optometrist refers people
when they need surgery.
3:20:29 PM
DR. ALFRED DERAMUS, Ophthalmologist, testified in opposition to
SB 55. He shared his professional background. He said the
legislation is poorly written and will not gather consensus on
either side of the issue because of its content. Some of the
language such as "invasive surgery" and "injections" are
inflammatory and don't adequately address what is and is not
surgical.
3:23:25 PM
PAUL BARNEY, Chair, Alaska Board of Optometry Examiners,
testified in support of SB 55. He said his primary concern is
the safety of the public. In his four years on the board there
have not been complaints that rose to the level of an
investigation. In general, optometrists are conservative and
cautious providers. The bill will not allow the board to write
regulations outside of optometrists' training. He mentioned the
board has oversight by the attorney general, the same as other
healthcare providers. They have no intention of lifting the
four-day limit on prescribing narcotics. SB 55 would modernized
the definition of optometry and reflect what is currently taught
in schools of optometry.
3:27:21 PM
DR. DAVID ZUMBRO, Ophthalmologist, testified in opposition to SB
55. He said his primary issue with SB 55 is that it attempts to
define invasive surgery. As written, the definition is
incomplete and wide open to interpretation. He suggested that be
changed.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if he has had optometrists do surgery and
had the patient referred to him afterwards.
DR. ZUMBRO said no.
3:29:12 PM
DR. ROBERT ARNOLD, representing himself, testified in opposition
to SB 55. He said, as a pediatric ophthalmologist, he performs
two complex procedures that are not described in the bill. His
concern is that the definition of surgery is loose and may be
open to interpretation. He noted oversight of safety for surgery
in Alaska occurs via licensure and hospital privilege surgical
review.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if he's had problems with optometrists
performing rash interventions.
DR. ARNOLD said he has not experienced surgical care by
optometrists, but he has experienced excellent care by them. His
partners have been optometrists. He said his concern is, as an
educator, that surgical oversight is not afforded to
optometrists.
3:32:09 PM
STEVE DOBSON, President, Alaska Optometric Association,
testified in support of SB 55. He shared his professional
background. He said Alaskans have benefitted tremendously from
the increase in access to quality medical optometric eye care
due to past legislation. The goal of the association is to
ensure the best practice of care and to attract the best
graduates from the colleges of optometry. SB 55 is not about
allowing eye surgery, but rather about board autonomy. To date
the board has demonstrated superb confidence, integrity, and
professionalism protecting the interest of the public and
passage of the bill would allow continuation of that.
CHAIR COSTELLO closed public testimony and held SB 55 in
committee.