Legislature(2017 - 2018)ADAMS ROOM 519
04/12/2018 09:00 AM House FINANCE
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 | |
| SB126 | |
| SB105 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 386 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 126 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 105 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 158 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 126
"An Act providing for an exception to the regulation
of the practice of medicine for a physician who
provides medical services to an athletic team from
another state."
9:08:52 AM
Co-Chair Foster reported that it was the first time the
bill was heard in committee.
JULI LUCKY, STAFF, SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON, shared that the
bill had been brought to the chair by a constituent who was
an orthopedic surgeon and member of the National Council of
Orthopedic Surgery and Spots Medicine. She explained that
the bill was part of a nationwide effort to provide
certainty for sports teams' physicians that were licensed
in another state and traveling with the team in other
states. The bill would add an exemption for state licensure
for the physicians traveling with sports teams. The
physician would have to be licensed to practice medicine in
another state, under a written contract to provide care to
an athletic team in that state and would be limited to
providing services to members of the team while they were
traveling or participating in a sporting event in Alaska.
The sponsor believed that the exemption was very specific.
She added that the first section of the bill dealt with the
exemption and the second section was a conforming amendment
that renumbered exemptions in existing statute.
Representative Wilson asked if the physicians would be
required to fill out any paperwork. Ms. Lucky answered that
the individuals would not have to fill out any additional
paperwork. She clarified that the bill did not allow any
hospital privileges. She relayed that the bill addressed
common concerns like an athlete who was without an asthma
inhaler and the student otherwise would have to go to a
clinic, which would be time consuming.
9:12:31 AM
Representative Thompson asked how other states handled the
issue. Ms. Lucky answered that the effort included getting
the measure passed in all 50 states. She reported that 48
states had either introduced or passed the legislation.
Representative Ortiz asked for the reason the constituent
had brought the issue forward. Ms. Lucky deferred to the
constituent to answer the question.
DR. JEFF MOORE, ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), replied that he was the national delegate
for the American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine and
the bill was a national program for the society. He
concurred that the bill was currently passed in 35 states
and was pending in 14 states and only allowed authority to
treat "simple" health issues.
Representative Ortiz deduced that the legislation was a
national effort to standardize the rights for visiting
physicians. Mr. Moore answered in the affirmative.
9:15:23 AM
Representative Guttenberg thought the bill seemed simple
and positive but wondered about the "mechanics". He
provided a scenario of a team member that lost their asthma
inhaler and the team doctor wrote a prescription, but the
pharmacist recognized that the physician was from out of
state. He asked how the situation would work. Mr. Moore
replied that without the bill, typically the traveling team
doctor could not prescribe out of state and would need to
call a local physician to get a prescription filled. He
reiterated that the bill precluded surgery. Representative
Guttenberg asked how the Alaskan pharmacist would know the
traveling physician had the authority. Mr. Moore answered
that the pharmacist would need a national "DEA" number
[Drug Enforcement Administration Registration Number].
Representative Kawasaki asked if a physician would have the
ability to write an order for an X-Ray. Mr. Moore answered
that the physicians would not have any inpatient privileges
and would not be able to order an x-ray.
Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony.
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony.
Vice-Chair Gara reviewed the previously published fiscal
impact note from the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development (DCCED) FN1 (CED). He noted the one-
time $2,500 for regulatory costs.
9:20:52 AM
Representative Guttenberg remarked that the committee saw a
variety of trivial fiscal notes. He asked what the $2,500
represented. Ms. Lucky deferred to DCCED.
DEBORA STOVERN, EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATOR, STATE MEDICAL
BOARD, DIVISION OF CORPORATE, BUSINESS, AND PROFESSIONAL
LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference), replied that the fiscal
note represented the cost for the board to adopt
regulations to implement the statute change. Representative
Guttenberg voiced that the answer did not address his
question.
JANEY MCCULLOUGH, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS,
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, answered that
the division estimated the costs to adopt regulations from
other similar previous regulation projects. The fiscal note
authorized the division to spend the money on behalf of the
licensees. Representative Guttenberg asked for further
clarification. Ms. McCullough replied that regulation
project costs did vary depending on the number of
interested parties that needed mail notification. She
stated that 731 people would be affected by the regulation
change. She pointed out that one newspaper ad was $772.
Ms. Lucky pointed out that the funds were receipt supported
services and General Fund (GF) was not used in updating
regulations.
Co-Chair Seaton MOVED to REPORT SB 126 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
SB 126 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with one previously published fiscal
impact note: FN1 (CED).
9:25:50 AM
AT EASE
9:26:15 AM
RECONVENED
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB126 Sectional Analysis ver J 3.19.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 126 |
| SB126 Supporting Documents-Suport Letters 3.19.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 126 |
| SB126 Sponsor Statement 3.19.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 126 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) Arctic Mental Health Working Group - Alaska's Mental Health Needs 4.5.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) Consolidated LOS 4.5.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) Nat'l Assoc State Mental Health Program Directors_Fact Sheets on Behavioral Health 4.5.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) Sectional Analysis 4.5.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) Sponsor Statement 4.5.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) Summary of Changes 4.5.18.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |
| CSSB 105(FIN) – LMFT PP.pdf |
HFIN 4/12/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 105 |