Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/23/1999 08:06 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 55-LONGEVITY BONUS ELIGIBILITY CHAIR JAMES announced that HB 55, "An Act relating to eligibility for the longevity bonus; and providing for an effective date," by request of the Governor, is before the committee. She mentioned she does not intend to move HB 55 out of committee today. Number 0600 ALISON ELGEE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administration, explained that HB 55 provides an income-cap in application for a longevity bonus program. It would allow people who made, as single people, less than $60 thousand, or as a married couple less than $80 thousand to continue to qualify for receipt of the longevity bonus. Individuals making an excess of that amount would be suspended from the program. They would not be disqualified forever if there was a change in the economic circumstances, they would be eligible if they had maintained every other residency provision of longevity bonus to get back on the program at whatever their suspended bonus amount was. MS. ELGEE pointed out that the Governor introduced HB 55 in an attempt to provide another means to reduce state spending. She said over half of the state's general fund spending is in pass- through programs that provide aid to individuals and local governments. These are formula programs because they're driven by statutory construct which dictates how much money is spent. To make an amendment to the longevity bonus program, the state would need a statutory change. Number 0624 MS. ELGEE further stated that, "The estimate of savings for this bill, is that we have approximately 8 percent of the seniors on the program that would end up losing the receipt of their longevity bonus as a result of this legislation. This is only an estimate. We do not collect income information in this state in any way to be able to absolutely verify that. What we are using is census data that is now 10 years old - looking at household incomes by age level in order to come up with that particular estimate." In addition to the savings that would accrue to the longevity bonus program, the department also pays close to $2 million in hold- harmless payment to recipients of SSI, supplemental social security income. The federal supplemental social security income program is written in such a way that if there is any kind of needs (indisc.), of a program like longevity bonus, the state would no longer have to pay the hold-harmless provision on the SSI side. They don't define what constitutes needs, so it is any kind of an income (indisc.), and would potentially save the state approximately $2 million in the hold-harmless payment. MS. ELGEE explained that the level was selected where the longevity bonus was not critical to an individual's ability to maintain financial independence. CHAIR JAMES announced a conflict because she is a longevity bonus recipient. [A majority of the other members declared a conflict in one way or another.] Number 0662 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked how many people would lose their eligibility. MS. ELGEE replied there would be approximately 24 or 25 thousand individuals on the bonus program. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON remarked that 4,000 to 5,000 Alaskans would be denied - anywhere from 250 down to 100 without regard of how long they lived here. MS. ELGEE replied that is correct, it would not make any judgement on residency whatsoever, it would just be based on income, income as reported on taxes. So, individual assets do not weigh into this calculation. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON noted that the difficulty in assessing the needs of an elderly person is often not predicated strictly by their income, it can be that they may need dialyses or special medication for example. CHAIR JAMES mentioned the longevity bonus program is phased-out and is going down every year. The attitude of the folks on the longevity bonus program is that it is not a welfare program. Therefore, having to submit their financial data to qualify is objectionable and insulting to them. Probably those, who have been here the longest, are the ones with the highest income. They worked hard to get that, so they shouldn't be denied on that basis. Number 0714 DAN KECK, Chairman, State Legislative Committee for AARP testified in opposition to HB 55 via teleconference from Sitka. He said this is not a new issue. AARP feels that HB 55 is not in the best interest to the state of Alaska and most certainly not to the seniors of our state. MR. KECK said, "Back in 1993, we sat in a number of meetings discussing the idea of phasing this out and a lot of our people didn't agree, but the majority of us said, 'Well, looking at the best interest of the state in a long run, maybe we should go ahead and phase it out,' and we agreed to that. And we feel the phase- out program was working very well and should be left intact and let it go ahead and phase the program out over a period of years. We never thought of it as being a relief program or welfare program, and if we start putting a means test in this, then that's what it will wind up to be." MR. KECK concluded, "And, someone making $60 thousand or so might have problems that would give them less money than someone in the lower income that qualifies for welfare programs. So we don't want to put those people all in the same boat. So, we would just like to go on record as opposing this program, we'd like for you to keep us aware of what's going on. I didn't know about this until almost 10 o'clock last night ... or we would have had a lot of people across the state ready to testify. So, in the future, if this comes up again, we will rally the forces and let you know how we all feel about it." CHAIR JAMES informed Mr. Keck that HB 55 will be heard again on Thursday. Number 0745 MS. ELGEE stated that this provision would be administered as simply as possible. The longevity bonus program is pretty much on an honor system in terms of residence verification at this time. She said the department occasionally matches longevity bonus recipients to permanent fund dividend applicants or works with Legislative Audit to do spot checking. MS. ELGEE said if this legislation were to pass, the department would operate the financial eligibility in the similar fashion. People would be asked whether or not they had income in excess of the levels that were set by statute. They would have to make their records available on audit, but they would not have to submit their records as a part of the verification of that eligibility. CHAIR JAMES noted that the scary part for folks is that: The commissioner of Administration may by, by regulation, in order to verify gross income amounts, provide for access to records of a person who is applying for or receiving a bonus; and establish procedures for auditing gross income statements made by a person who is applying for or receiving a bonus; establish appropriate procedures for a hearing at the request of a person determined under this section to be ineligible for the bonus. CHAIR JAMES mentioned that when she was doing taxes she always made the comment that, "Next to their marital relationship, their money was next in their serious concerns of privacy." [HB 55 was heard and held].
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|