Legislature(2021 - 2022)DAVIS 106
04/26/2022 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
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 | |
| HB382 | |
| SB132 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 382 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 132 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 26, 2022
4:53 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Liz Snyder, Co-Chair
Representative Tiffany Zulkosky, Co-Chair
Representative Ivy Spohnholz
Representative Zack Fields
Representative Ken McCarty
Representative Mike Prax
Representative Christopher Kurka
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 382
"An Act relating to insurance coverage for pharmacy services."
- MOVED CSHB 382(HSS) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 132
"An Act exempting veterinarians from the requirements of the
controlled substance prescription database."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 382
SHORT TITLE: INSULIN COVERAGE:INSURANCE;MEDICAID
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) SNYDER
02/22/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/22 (H) HSS, L&C
04/21/22 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/21/22 (H) Heard & Held
04/21/22 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
04/26/22 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
BILL: SB 132
SHORT TITLE: CONTROLLED SUB. DATA: EXEMPT VETERINARIAN
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) HOLLAND
04/28/21 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/28/21 (S) HSS, L&C
02/03/22 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/03/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/03/22 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
02/08/22 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/08/22 (S) Moved SB 132 Out of Committee
02/08/22 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
02/09/22 (S) HSS RPT 4DP
02/09/22 (S) DP: WILSON, REINBOLD, BEGICH, HUGHES
02/23/22 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/23/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/23/22 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/02/22 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/02/22 (S) Moved SB 132 Out of Committee
03/02/22 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/04/22 (S) L&C RPT 2NR 1DP
03/04/22 (S) NR: COSTELLO, REVAK
03/04/22 (S) DP: GRAY-JACKSON
03/04/22 (S) FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER L&C
03/17/22 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/17/22 (S) Heard & Held
03/17/22 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/22/22 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/22/22 (S) Moved SB 132 Out of Committee
03/22/22 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/23/22 (S) FIN RPT 7DP
03/23/22 (S) DP: STEDMAN, BISHOP, HOFFMAN, WILSON,
WIELECHOWSKI, OLSON, VON IMHOF
03/28/22 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/28/22 (S) VERSION: SB 132
04/04/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/04/22 (H) HSS, L&C
04/14/22 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/14/22 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/19/22 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/19/22 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/26/22 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
WITNESS REGISTER
COLEMAN CUTCHINS, PharmD, Clinical Pharmacist
Office of Substance Abuse & Addiction Prevention
Department of Health and Social Services
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
382.
LORI WING-HEIER, Director
Division of Insurance
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
382.
LAURA KELLER, Managing Director of Advocacy
American Diabetes Association
Phoenix, Arizona
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
382.
SENATOR ROGER HOLLAND
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented SB 132.
NIKKI ROSE, Staff
Senator Roger Holland
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis of SB 132
on behalf of Senator Holland, prime sponsor.
SARA CHAMBERS, Director
Division of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing,
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on SB
132.
MICHAELA DICK, DMV, Past President
Alaska Veterinary Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on SB
132.
LAURA CARRILLO, Administrator
Board of Pharmacy
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on SB
132.
ACTION NARRATIVE
4:53:47 PM
CO-CHAIR TIFFANY ZULKOSKY called the House Health and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 4:53 p.m.
Representatives Zulkosky, McCarty, Spohnholz, Snyder, Prax,
Fields, and Kurka were present at the call to order.
HB 382-INSULIN COVERAGE:INSURANCE;MEDICAID
4:55:07 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 382, "An Act relating to insurance
coverage for pharmacy services."
4:55:44 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER refreshed the committee on the purpose of HB
382, stating that the bill focused on the importance of
preventative care and improving access to affordable healthcare.
She explained that over the past few decades, the growth rate of
insulin costs had greatly outpaced that of inflation and become
incredibly expensive, with no generic versions of insulin
available. She reported that there were 50,000 Alaskans
diagnosed with diabetes, and that number increases every year.
In conclusion, she explained that the legislation would cap the
co-pay for insulin at $100 a month.
4:57:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY, acknowledging that he had missed the
previous hearing, asked what the price of insulin is to the
pharmacies and whether this bill would cause a negative impact
in their ability to procure insulin. He mentioned that some
states have had to "go out of country" to buy medicine and
questioned whether those states were doing the same for insulin.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER explained that insulin currently costs $200 per
vial, in comparison to $20 a vial in 1994. She shared that
while the typical usage for a diabetic patient is two vials a
month, this can go up to as many as five a month depending on a
variety of factors including severity and the ability to manage
the condition through diet and other lifestyle choices. She
stated that the question of going out of country for insulin was
not brought up in the previous hearing.
5:00:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX voiced his understanding that HB 382 would
alter the co-pay of existing policies and questioned whether the
bill would also affect future policies.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER confirmed that HB 382 would cap the price of
current and future policies.
5:00:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY inquired about utilizing the ability of
the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) to purchase
large quantities of medication to reduce the cost of insulin for
the state.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS suggested that Representative McCarty
refer to a letter from DHSS [included in the committee packet]
which addressed this topic and then direct any further questions
to Lori Wing-Heier, Director of the Division of Insurance,
within the Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development.
5:01:38 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
5:01:47 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked Representative McCarty to restate his
question and directed it to Coleman Cutchins from DHSS.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY noted that the state buys large
quantities of other medications, such as hepatitis treatments,
and asked whether the department could do the same with insulin.
5:02:42 PM
COLEMAN CUTCHINS, PharmD, Clinical Pharmacist, Office of
Substance Abuse & Addiction Prevention, Department of Health and
Social Services, explained that insulin is a refrigerated and
sterile product, meaning it requires more effort to store and
transport than other drugs. He noted that it requires extra
personnel to maintain those sorts of medicines and the
department is experiencing staffing issues that could be a
barrier to proper maintenance. He mentioned that there are some
generic versions of insulin available to the state at prices of
$25 a vial when buying in bulk quantities of at least 1,000
units.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY posited that because COVID-19
vaccinations have storage requirements similar to those for
insulin, mainly refrigeration, Alaska had provided employee
training and built up "a lot" of refrigerated facilities, which
he believes put the state in the position to be able to buy
insulin in bulk to reduce costs.
DR. CUTCHINS explained that there are 12-13 types of insulin on
the market which would present the department with the challenge
of deciding which types to carry. He emphasized that
implementing a system to purchase insulin would be complex.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked Lori Wing-Heier to share her perspective
on Representative McCarty's question.
5:05:37 PM
LORI WING-HEIER, Director, Division of Insurance, Department of
Commerce, Community & Economic Development, explained that the
state had supplied a letter to the committee to look into a
similar question brought up in the last hearing concerning
Utah's insulin distribution program, and that multiple
departments would be looking into whether or not a similar
program would be viable for Alaska. She reported that another
option the state was investigating was whether the Vaccine
Assessment Council could be amended to provide insulin. She
explained that both courses of action would require answering
the many logistic issues Dr. Cutchins discussed and specifically
the challenge of transporting a refrigerated medication from a
central distribution location to the far reaches of Alaska. She
acknowledged that the state had done this for the COVID-19
vaccines; however, those vaccines were frozen at -80 degrees
Fahrenheit while insulin required less intense refrigeration.
She emphasized that there would need to be statute changes if
the state were to amend the Vaccine Assessment Council and that
the state would be looking into the options for possible insulin
distribution.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether any of the amendments that
Ms. Wing-Heier mentioned could be added to HB 382 to expedite
the overall process.
MS. WING-HEIER explained that it could be possible to amend HB
382, but stated that based on previous testimony, this bill
would affect only the 15 percent diabetic Alaskans who are
insured. She shared her understanding that the committee would
want to include the uninsured in any state-wide insulin
distribution programs.
5:08:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked whether HB 382 would cause premium
increases for all those with health insurance or would be
localized to only those who have diabetes.
MS. WING-HEIER explained that any increase to premiums would be
negligible and that there had been no reports of increased
insulin costs from insurance companies dealing with this same
issue in other states.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER shared findings from studies on similar
legislation passed in other states that showed negligible
premium increases of 7-24 cents per person. She noted that a
study on the Washington co-pay cap saw a 2 percent decrease in
premiums. She argued that the initial increase across all
beneficiaries would improve access to insulin and allow diabetic
patients to better manage their health, leading to a cut in cost
overall as hospitalizations and complications associated with
poorly managed diabetes decrease.
5:10:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked why the price of insulin had gone up
so much and posited that for a drug that has been around for so
long, a generic version should be available.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER explained that individuals with diabetes must
take insulin to live and, with no alternatives available,
companies "can charge whatever they want" for insulin to fill
that demand.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX referred to the various forms of insulin
previously mentioned and sought confirmation that there were no
alternatives to insulin on the market.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER explained that the varied types of insulin were
due to differences in how patients administered it, as well as
who was producing and supplying it. She deferred to invited
expert Laura Keller for a more detailed explanation.
5:12:55 PM
LAURA KELLER, Managing Director of Advocacy, American Diabetes
Association, stated that there are no other replacements for
taking insulin for Type 1 diabetics such as herself. She
explained that the "generic" form of insulin mentioned
previously is a separate type called regular insulin that is not
used by most diabetic patients. She reported that the most
common type of insulin is analog, which had been out for decades
but has seen a massive jump in cost from $21 to over $300. She
mentioned that the current standard of care recommends insulin
pumps which require analog insulin and are covered by Medicare,
making them the most common devices in use in Alaska. She
acknowledged that regular insulin is available to patients but
has not received Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approval for
use in insulin pumps.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX opined that the problem seems to be
regulatory and that it is "odd" that the FDA is preventing other
companies from producing insulin.
DR. CUTCHINS said that before working for the state he had
worked as a practitioner in diabetes care. He explained that
regular insulin can be used in a pump but newer drugs are longer
lasting and protect against low blood sugar, which is why they
are preferred for Type 1 diabetes patients. He explained that
insulin, especially the analog types, is an expensive drug to
manufacture and that the lower profits mean many companies are
not interested in creating generic forms of the drugs. He
posited that even when a generic drug is made, it is often "not
much cheaper" than the brand name version.
5:17:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HB 382,
labeled 32-LS1494\A.1, Marx, 4/22/22, which read as follows:
Page 2, line 6:
Delete "$100"
Insert "$35"
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ reported that diabetes is one of the
most expensive health conditions in the country, leading to 27
percent of patients with diabetes rationing their insulin, which
can result in various complications that are even more expensive
in terms of health care. She explained that regular use of
insulin prevents issues like kidney failure, dialysis, and
amputations, as well as reducing the number of hospital visits
by 29 percent. She stated that the American Diabetes
Association (ADA) recommends a co-pay cap of $35 per month, a
figure that has been successfully adopted in legislation by
several states with varying "operating environments." She
opined that amending the cap from $100 to $35 monthly would
allow "average working Alaskans" better access to their needed
medication.
5:19:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked how much the average premium cost
would increase with a $35 cap in comparison to the original $100
cap.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ explained that in other states with a
cap of $35 there are increases as high as a dollar, but there
are also states, like Washington, that had a decrease in overall
cost. She explained that this was because the cost of any acute
care, such as a surgery or long term care [associated with a
diabetes complication], is also borne by all [policy holders on
the same plan].
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked whether there are any other factors
in the 1.8 percent decrease of premium costs in Washington.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ confirmed that the co-pay cap is the
only factor.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER added that the State of Washington passed a
second bill to lower the cap to $35 after the success of the
first cap. She also mentioned that there are 20 other states
who have instituted a cap between $35-$100 a month.
5:21:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether there are any states that
passed this legislation that had similar demographics to Alaska
in terms of population and diabetic residents. He also
questioned whether there could be a threat of insurance
companies deciding not to provide insulin in Alaska due to the
cut in co-pay, therein cutting off Alaska's supply of insulin.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ explained the demographic information
available is about states like Kentucky, Washington, and Utah,
which passed similar legislation. She stated that she could not
make a direct comparison to a "like state," but studies have
shown minimal increase to premiums. In regard to the insurance
companies, she reported that the loss of income from the reduced
premium is offset by a reduction of [expensive] high acuity of
care cases. She opined that instituting a cap is a way to
incentivize the companies to use their "significant market
position" to negotiate better manufacturing and distribution
costs.
5:24:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether the committee had heard any
testimony from insurance companies.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER replied that there is a letter from one company
that had been delivered to committee members' offices.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ referred to a report from the
Healthcare Cost Institute (HCI) on Type 1 diabetes and the
increasing costs of insulin. She explained that the HCI is an
insurance industry funded organization with the purpose of
examining health care costs in America.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX shared that in his experience working in
insurance sales, companies and employers invest in preventative
care, such as buying memberships to a gym, because they believe
that doing so saves money in insurance payouts overall. He
posited that if putting a co-pay cap in place decreases costs,
insurance companies would have done so before. He said he
wished to hear directly from insurance companies for that
reason.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER voiced her opinion that the path of least
resistance for insurance companies is going with "the status
quo," and she explained that the legislation would add positive
pressure for those companies to address the problem directly
with insulin manufacturers. She referred to a statement from
America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), a national insurance
organization, that suggested many other forms of cost reduction
with which she agreed. However, she stated that [AHIP's]
argument that insurance premiums would rise substantially cited
an out-of-date study from Kentucky, which gave her pause when
considering how much stock to put into that testimony.
5:29:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS recapped part of the conversation held
during the previous hearing by stating that the cost savings
from reducing hospital visits and expensive, long term
complications through the proper use of insulin are harder to
quantify than immediate premium costs, which could account for
why they have not been quantified yet.
5:29:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked what is currently in statute to
regulate the cost of co-pay and how the split of who would pay
for what portion of prescriptions is structured.
5:30:42 PM
MS. WING-HEIER explained that there is not anything in statute
other than what was directed by the federal government in the
Affordable Care Act, and that the amount of co-pay depends on
the specific plan. She explained that the purpose of this bill
is to rectify that.
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked whether there are plans available on
the market with higher premiums that would cover more of the
cost of prescriptions.
MS. WING-HEIER replied that there are plans that cost much more
that would have lower co-pays.
5:32:26 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY removed her objection to the motion to adopt
Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA objected.
5:32:32 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Sponholz, Fields,
Zulkosky, and Snyder voted in favor of Amendment 1 to HB 382.
Representatives Prax, Kurka, and McCarty voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote of 4-3.
5:33:32 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER moved to report HB 382, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY noted there was an [inaudible] objection.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Sponholz, Fields,
Snyder, and Zulkosky voted in favor of the motion to report HB
382, as amended, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
Representatives Prax, Kurka, and McCarty voted against it.
Therefore, CSHB 382(HSS) was reported out of the House Health
and Social Services Standing Committee by a vote of 4-3.
5:34:35 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 5:34 p.m. to 5:36 p.m.
SB 132-CONTROLLED SUB. DATA: EXEMPT VETERINARIAN
5:36:07 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the final order of business
would be SENATE BILL NO. 132 "An Act exempting veterinarians
from the requirements of the controlled substance prescription
database."
5:38:09 PM
SENATOR ROGER HOLLAND, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, read the sponsor statement for SB 132 [included in the
committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Alaska's 25th legislature created the Prescription
Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) in 2008. The
legislative intent behind the PDMP was to create a
database of prescriptions for controlled substances in
the state. The PDMP may create obstacles for
individuals seeking opioids to obtain multiple
prescriptions from registered providers and may be a
useful tool for human doctors in combating the
opioid crisis. Under the current statutory framework,
Alaska's veterinarians are required to participate in
the PDMP, despite the irreconcilable differences
between human and veterinary medical practice. PDMPs
have been implemented in all 50 states, but 34 states
have recognized the unsuitability of veterinary
participation in the PDMP and exempted veterinarians.
SB 132 would add Alaska to that list.
The majority of states exempt veterinarians from PDMP
because they have recognized that PDMPs are designed
for use in human medicine; and veterinary exclusion
from PDMPs does not increase risk to the public.
Alaska's inclusion of veterinarians in the PDMP has
produced no identifiable benefit; yet the PDMP has
created a multitude of verifiable harms to the
veterinary profession and the Alaskans they serve. The
PDMP is inappropriate and not effective for use with
animal patients, as animals do not have identifiers
such as a social security number, and veterinarians
must view human owners' private health data before
treating an animal.
Alaska has the highest veterinary licensure cost in
the United States. Veterinary participation in the
PDMP contributes to this unnecessary financial burden
on a profession already experiencing extreme staffing
shortages, decreasing availability of veterinary
services to Alaskans. Moreso, a recent survey found
attempted veterinary doctor shopping across the entire
United States is essentially non-existent.
Veterinarians are tightly regulated by the Drug
Enforcement Agency, the Know Your Customer Act, and
the State licensing board. SB 132 seeks to correct an
expensive overreach so that Alaskans can have access
to treatment for their pets without compromising
public safety.
5:41:24 PM
NIKKI ROSE, Staff, Senator Roger Holland, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Senator Holland, prime sponsor, gave
the sectional analysis of SB 132 [included in the committee
packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Sec. 1 AS 17.30.200(o), relating to the controlled
substance prescription database, is amended by
deleting the Board of Veterinary Examiners from the
list of required notification by the Board of Pharmacy
when a practitioner registers with the database.
Sec. 2 Adds veterinarians to the list of practitioners
not required to comply with the controlled substance
prescription database under AS 17.30.200(t).
Sec. 3 Adds a definition of "practitioner" to AS
17.30.200(u)
Sec. 4 Repeals AS 08.98.050(a)(10), which obligates
the board of veterinary examiners to require licensees
to register with the controlled substance prescription
database.
5:42:31 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked who manages the PDMP.
SENATOR HOLLAND explained that the expert who could answer that
question was no longer available.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY directed the question to Sara Chambers from
the Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
(DCCED).
5:43:35 PM
SARA CHAMBERS, Director, Division of Corporations, Business and
Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community &
Economic Development (DCCED), replied that the PDMP is monitored
by DCCED staff through the Board of Pharmacy which is in charge
of PDMP implementation.
5:44:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked for confirmation of his
understanding that when a pet is owned by multiple parties, as
in a family pet, whoever brings the pet to the veterinarian
would have their identification (ID) number entered into the
PDMP.
SENATOR HOLLAND explained that the ID number could come from any
person who drops off a pet when the prescription of opioids is
necessary; it does not have to be the owner. He stated that the
regulations simply require a number to be entered.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY stated that this seems to dilute
effectiveness of the PDMP since multiple identifiers could be
listed for the same animal.
SENATOR HOLLAND explained that due to time constraints, he had
not been able to use the prepared PowerPoint during his
presentation, and he noted that it is a valuable resource for
answering many of the basics about the bill.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked what collaboration has occurred between
DCCED and veterinarians to solve issues with PMDP.
5:46:59 PM
MS. CHAMBERS responded that DCCED has conducted many
conversations with the Board of Pharmacy and the Board of
Veterinary Examiners to address how regulations should be set to
conform with statute and whether or not statute needs to be
changed. She said that there have been varying levels of follow
through among the different entities that have a responsibility
to participate in these discussions. She reported that the
department has published instructions on how veterinarians can
use the PDMP and that she had received positive feedback from
veterinarians that the instructions made using the PDMP
possible. However, she mentioned that many veterinarians still
have concerns about how to align day-to-day operations with
statute.
5:49:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked how long the department has been
working with veterinarians to fix the issue.
MS. CHAMBERS answered since the legislation passed in 2016.
5:49:49 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER shared her understanding that many of the issues
veterinarians have been experiencing with PMDP relate to the
navigability of the database itself. She asked what kind of
changes have been made to the database to make it more [user
friendly].
MS. CHAMBERS voiced her belief that there had been changes
implemented but directed the question to Laura Carrillo for more
details on PMDP.
SENATOR HOLLAND also referred the question to Michaela Dick, a
veterinarian who has had a lot of experience with the PDMP and
has been advocating for change.
5:51:27 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER restated her question about what changes, if
any, have been made to the database since 2017.
MICHAELA DICK, DMV, Past President, Alaska Veterinary
Association, replied that "we haven't really been working on it"
and that there has been more of a focus on conversations with
the department and the boards due to investigations that have
been launched on veterinarians not being able to use the system.
She explained that because veterinarians work with animals
rather than people, they are unable to look up anything in the
database since their patients do not have identification
numbers. She opined that any fixes made to the database did not
solve the core problem of veterinarians being unable to comply
with statute.
5:53:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked what changes to regulation have
been discussed to make the PDMP more user-friendly for
veterinarians while still meeting the public health need of
tracking opioids. First, she posited that vets could be
required to login only on days that they prescribe opioids.
Second, she suggested making the only ID number associated with
the animal be connected to the responsible financial party.
5:55:16 PM
LAURA CARRILLO, Administrator, Board of Pharmacy, Department of
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, explained that
the department has had "very fruitful discussions" with the
Board of Veterinary Examiners but the discussions have not yet
resulted in policy suggestions. She voiced concern about
comingling of data and explained that DCCED has adjusted coding
within the database to clarify species and published guidelines
to help veterinarians know which codes to use. She deferred the
question about regulations around discerning pet ownership to
the veterinarians.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that SB 132 was held over.
5:57:48 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health and Social Services Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 5:57 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 382 Amendment #1.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
HB 382 |
| SB 132 v.A.PDF |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Fiscal Notes DCCED 2.1.22.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 AKVMA White Paper.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Letters of Opposition as of 4.8.22.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM HL&C 5/13/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Lincoln University Study PDMP Custom Tailoring is needed 2014.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Letters of Support as of 4.13.22.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM HL&C 5/13/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Presentation 4-14-22.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
SB 132 |
| SB 132 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM HL&C 5/13/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 132 |
| HB382 DOI Response to Question from (H)HSS Committee 04.26.2022.pdf |
HHSS 4/26/2022 3:00:00 PM |
HB 382 |