Legislature(2003 - 2004)
01/27/2004 08:00 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 337-ANATOMICAL GIFTS REGISTRY Number 2833 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the next order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 337, "An Act relating to anatomical donor registries, to an anatomical gift awareness fund, to an anatomical gift awareness program, and to motor vehicle licenses and registrations." Number 2846 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for HB 337, Version 23-LS1257\S, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version S was before the committee. TAPE 04-07, SIDE B Number 2955 [The committee aide, in response to a question from Representative Gruenberg, said that Version S is the formal committee substitute.] Number 2909 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ turned to page 2, line 19, of Version S, which read as follows: (b) A registry must include only residents of this state. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked if it is correct that nonresidents can get driver's licenses [currently]. HEATH HILYARD, Staff to Representative Lesil McGuire, Alaska State Legislature, answering questions on behalf of Representative McGuire, sponsor, offered his understanding that Representative Berkowitz is correct. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked, "So, if a nonresident were to fill out the donor registration card, what happens then?" MR. HILYARD replied that when the Department of Revenue's Permanent Fund Division looks at qualifications for residency, obtaining a driver's license is "one measure"; therefore, he stated his understanding that [applying for] a driver's license is a declaration of residency. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said his question is not in regard to residents, but rather to nonresidents. He stated his understanding that not only can nonresidents get licenses in [Alaska], but also in some circumstances they are required to do so, if they are working here for some period of time, for example. He asked what the protocol [for issuing an] organ [donor] card would be when a nonresident gets a driver's license. Number 2847 JILL STEINHAUS, Director of Development, LifeCenter Northwest, responded that people who go through the driver's license application can make their decision about donations at that time and will be included in the Alaska registry. If anything were to happen to them while they were in Alaska, that information would be used for indicating their decision to donate. If those people were to move outside of the state and have a driver's license issued in a different state, then that newer license would "trump" the previous one, as far as an indication of organ donation. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ clarified that his concern is that the registry must include only residents of the state. He asked how a nonresident who wants to register [as an organ donor] would be accommodated. MS. STEINHAUS answered that typically, procurement organizations have contacted a nonresident's state of residency and "ensured that they're able to register through their state's registration system," and then have made note of that in their own system. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ noted that there are, unfortunately, many nonresidents who perish while on the road, and he wants to make certain that their organs are available for donation; otherwise they're lost to everybody. MS. STEINHAUS responded yes. She noted that what would happen when someone dies while "on the road" is [the procurement organizations] would revert to following the statute of the state that person is from, based on the card that he/she is carrying. Number 2747 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ responded, "Yes and no." He said he understands what would happen in the instance where someone is [in Alaska] carrying a Minnesota driver's license; however, when a Minnesota resident has acquired an Alaska driver's license, and the statute specifically precludes them from being registered [as an organ donor in Alaska], they may fall through the cracks. CHAIR WEYHRAUCH asked if Representative Berkowitz is referring to temporary driver's licenses that the state issues. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ responded as follows: I know if people come up here and work for more than 30 ... or 45 days - ... I don't recall the exact time period - they're required to get an Alaskan operator's license. ... Truckers who come up here, [for example]. I just want to make sure that someone who wants to make a contribution, whether they're an Alaska resident or not, ... [doesn't] just fall through the cracks because our paperwork precludes them from being involved. Number 2690 MS. STEINHAUS responded that that would not preclude them from donating. She said, essentially, HB 337 is setting up a database system for information specifically [regarding] the residents of Alaska. She stated her understanding that Representative Berkowitz is concerned about those people who are nonresidents of Alaska who have documents identifying them as being in Alaska for "at least a period of time." She said, "What we would do is work with them on an individual basis, identify their decision about donation, and ensure that no individual who may perish here in the state of Alaska would be exempt from donating." She said that, in a sense, that would be a separate process than "what we're establishing here." She mentioned federal guidelines enacted in 1998, which require that every individual who passes away be considered a potential donor at the time of death. Number 2661 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his interpretation that the only people who can be in the registry are Alaskan residents. Therefore, a student who maintains his/her voting registry in another state, but gets an Alaska driver's license, could get the [donor sticker] on that [license], but would not be included in the registry. He asked if that is the intent of the bill. Number 2626 MS. STEINHAUS responded that that is not the intent of the bill. Number 2613 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he thinks Representatives Berkowitz and Seaton share his concern, which is the use of word "must" on page 2, line 19. That can be read two ways: as a term of direction - you must do it, or as a term of exclusion - you can only do it. He asked what the sponsor's intent is. MR. HILYARD indicated the original bill version and said, "That was a particularly sticky phrase." He pointed to [page 2, beginning on line 19] of the original bill version, which read: (b) A registry must include all residents of this state, regardless of their residence within the service area designated by the federal government. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the language deleted had been the word "all" and the phrase following the comma; however, the term "must" was there and was equally ambiguous. He asked Mr. Hilyard what he wants to do in order to be clearer in the drafting. MR. HILYARD responded by asking at what point residency is declared or someone is considered to have become a resident. He suggested that someone from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) [may better answer that question]. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Mr. Hilyard to put aside the DMV and asked him if he wants to "limit it to only residents of the state." MR. HILYARD answered, "Generally, no." Number 2523 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked what would happen if that line were just deleted. MR. HILYARD answered, "Nothing, to my understanding." He mentioned that [the sponsor] had held a discussion with [Legislative Legal and Research Services] debating the use of the word "only" versus "all". Number 2490 DUANE BANNOCK, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV), Department of Administration, stated that when a person comes to the DMV who is not a resident and he/she applies for a driver's license, the DMV will collect [donor registry] data, even if that person is a resident of Washington state, for example. He said that if Life Alaska gets that information, it will disseminate it to, presumably, the Washington state registry. He stated that the DMV tends to ask 100 percent of its customers to become an organ donor. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Bannock if he would have any heartburn if the committee were to remove [line 19, on page 2 of Version S]. MR. BANNOCK answered no. He noted, "Section 13.50 isn't necessarily the DMV section." MS. STEINHAUS, in response to the same question posed this time by Chair Weyhrauch, replied that her only concern is that "what we're addressing here is a registry that is for the purposes of use in Alaska." She said that, providing [the committee members] are okay with striking that language, it would be in the best interest of the bill. Number 2375 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM asked how the change being discussed might affect the size of the registry, and if [that decision] would run the risk of making [the registry] so complex that it cannot be accessed easily. MS. STEINHAUS explained that essentially it would open up the registry to be utilized by individuals from other states. The downfall to that, she said, is that other states' statutes may be different from the statutes in Alaska, regarding anatomical gifts. She said, "In Alaska we're able to use an anatomical gift as consent for donation, so this system allows us to access that individual's decision." She noted that that may not be the case for somebody in another state, where other state statutes would apply. It would be the responsibility of the procurement organization to be aware of those statutes and to facilitate that donation appropriately. She concluded, "It won't limit the ability to recover organs and tissues from individuals and to allocate them to the people most in need." Number 2313 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON turned to the language in the original bill version regarding this issue [previously provided] and said it appears there may be some legal parameters of residency within "this federal service area." He suggested that the word "must" could be replaced by the word "may". He said that Legislative Legal and Research Services may be defining the federal service area. He said that, at this point, he is uncomfortable "expanding or contracting too much." CHAIR WEYHRAUCH summarized that if the committee chooses to delete the language [on page 2, line 19 of Version S], it would be indicating its intent to broaden the effect of the registry. In regard to Representative Seaton's concern regarding the legal issue related to removing the language as it may relate "to some federal area," he noted that some of the members on this committee sit on the bill's next committee of referral. He suggested that they prepare a legal analysis for the benefit of that next committee of referral. Number 2181 MR. HILYARD clarified that the federal service [area] to which the language in the original bill version referred, is a service area recognized by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for organ procurement organizations. He offered his understanding - regarding the drafting of Legislative Legal and Research Services and whether or not the language in question "can remain in or be removed" - that the Alaska DMV [is] responsible for collecting and distributing the information collected from "it's residents." He stated that he thinks the committee is getting stuck on the definition of resident and what is residency. CHAIR WEYHRAUCH offered that the word [being questioned] is "must". Number 2147 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ moved to delete line 19 on page 2 of Version S. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Number 2100 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH closed public testimony. Number 2087 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated that he would like the sponsor to get a legal analysis of the removal that was just made by the committee, before the bill is taken up by the next committee of referral. Number 2069 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report CSHB 337, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 337(STA) was moved out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|