02/28/2001 01:10 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
February 28, 2001
1:10 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Chair
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair
Representative Jeannette James
Representative John Coghill
Representative Kevin Meyer
Representative Ethan Berkowitz
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Albert Kookesh
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 4
"An Act relating to offenses involving operating a motor
vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft while under the influence of an
alcoholic beverage or controlled substance; relating to implied
consent to take a chemical test; relating to registration of
motor vehicles; relating to presumptions arising from the amount
of alcohol in a person's breath or blood; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 4
SHORT TITLE:OMNIBUS DRUNK DRIVING AMENDMENTS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)ROKEBERG
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/08/01 0024 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 12/29/00
01/08/01 0024 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/08/01 0024 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
02/22/01 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
02/22/01 (H) Heard & Held
MINUTE(TRA)
02/27/01 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
02/27/01 (H) Moved CSHB 4(TRA) Out of
Committee
MINUTE(TRA)
02/28/01 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
JANET SEITZ, Staff
to Representative Norman Rokeberg
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 118
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Assisted with the presentation of HB 4 and
answered questions.
VALERIE THERRIEN, Vice Chair
Legislative Committee
Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
779 8th Avenue
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4 and answered
questions.
ERIC TOMASINO, Executive Director
Teen Challenge
PO Box 4281
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4 and answered
questions.
ROSALIE NADEAU, Akeela House Inc.
4111 Minnesota Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in general support of HB 4, but
expressed concerns about funding.
JOE MURDY, Co-Chair
DUI Prevention Task Force
1904 West 46th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4 and answered
questions.
CRISTY WILLER TILDEN, Program Director
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Services
Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation
PO Box 786
Dillingham, Alaska 99576
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4 and answered
questions.
DONNA R. GALBREATH, M.D.
1958 Kittiwake Lane
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4 and answered
questions.
JANET McCABE, Chair
Partners for Downtown Progress
1326 K Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion on HB 4, answered
questions regarding the use of Naltrexone.
CINDY CASHEN, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)
Juneau Chapter
211 4th Street, Suite 102
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4, and provided
information regarding .08 blood alcohol concentration (BAC)
statistics.
GERRY KNASIAK, Public Member
Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
119 Austin Street
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 4.
SARAH WILLIAMS, Substance Abuse Program Coordinator
Inmate Programs
Division of Institutions
Department of Corrections
4500 Diplomacy Drive, Suite 109
Anchorage, Alaska 99508-5927
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 4, provided
information on the Sixth Avenue Correctional Center.
AGNES SWEETSIR
PO Box 8
Galena, Alaska 99741
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 4, spoke on the
issue of treatment and provided anecdotal examples of the
effects of alcoholism on her family and community.
ORIE WILLIAMS
PO Box 688
Bethel, Alaska 99559
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 4, related personal
experience with alcoholism and the effects of treatment.
MELINDA FREEMON, Executive Director
Salvation Army Clitheroe Center
1709 South Bragaw Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion on HB 4, addressed the
topic of treatment and answered questions.
CHERYL MANN
Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
PO Box 240434
Anchorage, Alaska 99524
POSITION STATEMENT: During the discussion on HB 4, gave a
summary of the report produced by the Advisory Board on
Alcoholism and Drug Abuse.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-27, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR NORMAN ROKEBERG called the House Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:10 p.m. Representatives
Rokeberg, Ogan, Coghill, and Meyer were present at the call to
order. Representatives James and Berkowitz arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
HB 4 - OMNIBUS DRUNK DRIVING AMENDMENTS
[Contains discussion of HB 172.]
Number 0052
CHAIR ROKEBERG announced that the committee would hear HOUSE
BILL NO. 4, "An Act relating to offenses involving operating a
motor vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft while under the influence
of an alcoholic beverage or controlled substance; relating to
implied consent to take a chemical test; relating to
registration of motor vehicles; relating to presumptions arising
from the amount of alcohol in a person's breath or blood; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was
CSHB 4(TRA).]
CHAIR ROKEBERG, speaking as the sponsor of HB 4, explained that
the fiscal note did not reflect the version before the
committee. He added that the ".16 blood alcohol concentration
(BAC) aggravators" had been removed, which cut the original $33
million fiscal note down to about $8.5 million. He said it was
his intention that the committee will analyze HB 4 and the costs
of the sections therein in order to decide where the financial
emphasize should be placed. He added that the goal of HB 4 is
to separate habitual drunk drivers from their vehicles;
additionally, the importance of treatment will be taken into
consideration.
Number 0374
JANET SEITZ, Staff to Representative Norman Rokeberg, Alaska
State Legislature, noted that the sponsor, the House
Transportation Standing Committee, the administration, the
"mayor's DUI task force," as well as other interested parties
all took part in the creation of HB 4. She also noted the
packet contained news articles from across the state,
highlighting some of the tragedies caused by drunk drivers.
MS. SEITZ went on to explain the changes effected by HB 4. The
term "driving while intoxicated (DWI)" will be changed to
"driving while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or
controlled substance (DUI)." It clarifies that a DUI will
include alcoholic beverages, intoxicating liquors, and
controlled substances - which also include inhalants.
Presumptive sentences for first felony convictions for
manslaughter resulting from a DUI will be increased from five to
seven years. The Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) will be
mandated to refuse vehicle registration to persons who do not
have a driver's license, or have a suspended or revoked license.
Persons who register a vehicle will be required to use their
full name, that being their first, middle, and last name.
MS. SEITZ also said that HB 4 would make changes to various
sections [of statute] by replacing the term "reasonable grounds"
with the term "probable cause". This change arises out of the
court case Leslie v. State. Another effect of HB 4 will be that
the court will be mandated to notify the DMV, by the end of the
following business day, when someone is convicted of a DUI, so
that the DMV can take the appropriate actions. Minimum license
revocations will also be established by passage of HB 4.
Another change will be that persons with a limited driver's
license shall only operate vehicles equipped with a functioning
ignition interlock device. Also, before a person's driver's
license can be reinstated, he or she must have met the
alcoholism screening, evaluation, referral, and program
requirements. In addition, the driver's license reinstatement
fees will be raised for persons convicted of DUI.
MS. SEITZ also explained HB 4 would require an "enabler"
(someone who loans a car to another who is known not to have
valid driver's license because of DUI) to face driver's license
revocation as well as pay a fine. She noted that DUI includes
motor vehicles, aircraft, and watercraft. Also, the blood
alcohol [concentration] limit will be lowered to .08. The fines
and jail sentences on various misdemeanors and felonies will be
raised. Another requirement will be that the past treatment
history of a defendant shall be provided to the court,
prosecutor, and any agency involved in treatment, so long as the
release of such information does not come into conflict with
federal guidelines.
Number 0606
MS. SEITZ added that the "look-back" provision in current
statute will have a phased-in increase to ten years. This means
that if a person has three DUI/DWI convictions within a ten-year
period, the third one will be a felony. The class C felony fine
will be increased, as will the sentences for felonies. Vehicle
(including watercraft) forfeiture will be required if used in a
DUI offense. Under HB 4, if a driver's license has been
permanently revoked, DMV can review the case and restore the
license if certain conditions are met. People who are
incarcerated but do not satisfy their treatment requirements
will not be eligible for "good time." In addition, treatment is
mandatory for offenders while they are imprisoned. There are
also provisions in HB 4 that require a person convicted of DUI
to return his or her vehicle registration plates to DMV. In
these instances the co-owner of the vehicle can reregister it.
These provisions will prevent a person who should not be driving
from having a registered vehicle.
MS. SEITZ also said that under HB 4, the impairment standards
will be lowered to .04 [BAC]. There is also a requirement for
clear notification of an individual's right to obtain an
independent [BAC] test. The police will be authorized to obtain
a blood sample where exigent circumstances prevent the
administration of a breath test (this comes from an Alaska
Supreme Court case, Sosa v. State). An Alaska Repeat Offender
Status System will also be established under HB 4. This
database will enable car dealers and co-owners to learn if an
individual is eligible to register a vehicle. The effective
date of HB 4, with the exception of the Alaska Repeat Offender
Status System, is July 1, 2001. Ms. Seitz noted that the
aforementioned points constituted just a brief overview of the
changes encompassed by HB 4.
Number 0765
VALERIE THERRIEN, Vice Chair, Legislative Committee, Advisory
Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse ("Advisory Board"), noted
that she was also a private attorney in Fairbanks and had taught
classes in criminology. She said that both she and the Advisory
[Board] supported HB 4. She also said she wanted the committee
to keep in mind the issue of treatment. She emphasized that
treatment does work. If the periods of incarceration are going
to be increased, she asked members to keep in mind the costs
involved in treating individuals who are incarcerated. She
noted that various providers of treatment have indicated to her
that they are having a difficult time providing treatment under
current funding limitations.
MS. THERRIEN reported that she had given a talk about DUI laws
at her daughter's middle school's eighth-grade classes. She
said that the children expressed concern about such issues as
their friends getting caught DUI, having alcohol in the trunk,
or having marijuana in the glove compartment. She noted that
part of the discussion she attributed to just kids being kids,
but she also noted that the children seemed very aware of the
penalties of losing their driver's licenses. She said that she
thought that when looking at young offenders it was important to
keep in mind that sort of "handle." She also informed members
that out of 80 children in the eighth grade, four of them were
actively "huffing," and over 50 percent were drinking.
MS. THERRIEN also reported that Fort Wainwright had recently
held a "stand down," which was a base-wide training on domestic
violence issues. She reminded members that much of domestic
violence is caused by drug and alcohol abuse. She noted that
four children have died at Fort Wainwright in the last year from
abuse; subsequently, Fort Wainwright has taken a strong position
with regard to ending domestic violence. She used this
information to illustrate the seriousness of the issue in
Fairbanks.
MS. THERRIEN, on the point of treatment in jail, said that she
was recently given statistics that she found to be
overwhelmingly supportive of treatment. She said 20 women were
given treatment and compared with 20 women who were not given
treatment; the number of participants with new felony charges
from the group that did not receive treatment was five, versus
just one from the group that did receive treatment from the
residential substance abuse treatment (RSAT) program. The
number of women re-incarcerated was significantly lower in the
RSAT group than in the group that did not receive treatment:
one from the RSAT group versus six from the group without
treatment. She followed up this information by saying that the
Hiland Mountain Correctional Center RSAT program was showing
great success, and she supported any provisions in HB 4 that
would ensure that people in jail got treatment.
MS. THERRIEN offered to provide members with the statistics she
was referring to. She reiterated her comments about the success
of the Hiland Mountain Correctional Center RSAT program, and
noted that it began November 1, 1998. She added that increasing
jail time and fines is not as effective as providing treatment.
Number 1155
CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that currently, treatment programs are
voluntary for people incarcerated in Alaska. Under HB 4,
treatment would become mandatory. He added that funding for
treatment was reflected in the fiscal notes.
MS. THERRIEN mentioned that wellness courts were also
experiencing great success; when Arizona began a similar
program, it experienced a re-indictment rate of only 6 percent.
She added that anytime people can be kept out of jail and given
treatment with appropriate follow-up care, the state will save
money. She affirmed, for Representative Berkowitz, that she
felt that treatment was absolutely critical for the success of
any comprehensive anti-DUI/DWI strategy. Without having proper
treatment programs coupled with appropriate follow-up programs,
the likelihood of having repeat offenders increases. She also
confirmed that the studies she had looked at showed that
investments in treatment yielded cost benefits over the long
run, which resulted in net savings.
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER said in his experience, an alcoholic can be
taken to treatment, but unless that person wants to change, the
treatment is ineffective. He asked how someone could be
mandated to accept treatment.
MS. THERRIEN explained that when someone is in a felony or
misdemeanor situation and is about to lose his or her license to
practice law or medicine, there is a possibility that treatment
will be mandated. She said she thought that if the courts were
to begin consistently mandating treatment as a part of
sentencing, it would increase the offender's incentive to
complete treatment so that he or she could go back to work. She
noted that the emphasis in drug, wellness, and youth courts is
to get to individuals early and provide treatment, because the
earlier someone is given treatment, the greater the likelihood
of success. She said it was important to fund the Alcohol
Safety Action Program (ASAP) as well as other programs that
provide follow-up care. She also noted that if a medical
provider, through ASAP, and the treatment proposal advocated the
use of Naltrexone, then a judge could require the drug's use as
part of sentencing. Naltrexone is a drug used to decrease a
person's craving for alcohol, and when used during the first
three months of treatment, the person becomes much more
receptive to further treatment.
Number 1393
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER said that during the instances of
intervention that he was familiar with, the persons had already
lost their jobs, lost their spouses, lost their children; they
had lost everything, and there did not seem to be anything more
that could be used as an incentive to encourage participation in
a treatment program. He said his concern was that if a person
did not want to go to treatment, the treatment program was not
going to be successful.
MS. THERRIEN countered that she did not think anyone really
wants to go to treatment to begin with, but when the court
system and employers get involved, treatment becomes successful.
She noted that everybody has to reach bottom at a different
time.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he was aware of new studies that
showed that even forced treatment has a positive effect. The
old thinking that "people have to want to go to treatment" no
longer applies.
CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that HB 4 has some mandated treatment for
incarcerated individuals that is "against the carrot of the
'good time'"; thus there could be a significant incentive for
people to choose treatment. He added that participation in the
treatment programs offered through the wellness courts is
voluntary.
MS. THERRIEN added that perhaps people who are not interested in
participating in the current treatment programs may also have
mental health issues contributing to their problems, and those
issues need to be addressed before the substance abuse problems
can be taken care of.
Number 1527
ERIC TOMASINO, Executive Director, Teen Challenge, said that he
supported HB 4 primarily because it addressed the issue of
treatment. He added that Teen Challenge is a "faith-based"
program, which has a men's center in Palmer and a women's center
in Anchorage. He also noted that he is on the Governor's
Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, and has been on it
for the past seven years. He acknowledged that HB 4 carries a
large fiscal note; nevertheless, he encouraged members to keep
moving forward with it because studies indicate that the price
paid is higher for inaction. He said that the opportunity to
treat people while they are incarcerated should not be passed
up. He said he also liked the idea of the establishment of a
DWI/drug pilot court. He said the implementation of this
concept has proven successful in other states. He finalized his
comments by encouraging members to pass HB 4 with an appropriate
fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that faith-based ministries, which
help in "this area," are on the upswing. He added that the
difference between incentives and coercion is a topic that is
given careful consideration by the legislature when making
policy decisions. He asked Mr. Tomasino to describe how
effective incentives were, and how coercion helps in his work
with youth.
MR. TOMASINO responded that coercion is a step towards getting a
person into treatment. He said that that is a necessary step,
even if it has to be mandated. Each person has to be looked at
individually; in his case, coercion worked as the first step
towards changing his life around.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that if a choice is offered, that
could provide the coercive action; but he said he viewed HB 4 as
coming dangerously close to governmental mandate.
MR. TOMASINO concluded by saying that the Advisory Board
presents recommendations every year to the legislature, and HB 4
encompasses many of those issues as an entire package.
Number 1809
ROSALIE NADEAU, Akeela House Inc. ("Akeela"), said that although
generally supportive of HB 4, she still had concerns. As
background, she noted that she provides much of the budget
planning for Akeela each year. The Department of Corrections
(DOC) contracts with Akeela and other private businesses to
provide services within the prison system. Akeela is the
largest provider of drug and alcohol treatment services within
the state's prison system. Akeela has programs in Bethel [at
Yukon-Koskokwim Correctional Center]; in Seward, at Spring Creek
Correctional Center ("Spring Creek"); and in Kenai, at Wildwood
Correctional Center ("Wildwood") - both RSAT and inmate
substance abuse treatment (ISAT) programs. She noted that RSAT
is a residential program wherein folks are collected in one area
and segregated from the rest of the [prison] population. She
also noted that Akeela is present in the Palmer Correctional
Center ("Palmer"), Palmer [Mat-Su] Pretrial Correctional Center
("Mat-Su"), and at the Point MacKenzie Rehabilitation Center
("Point MacKenzie"). Ms. Nadeau offered that Akeela understands
treatment programs in the prison system. Akeela likes the fact
that HB 4 mandates treatment; mandated treatment does work. She
said she could provide research data to support the claim that
mandated treatment is successful. She noted that most of the
research evidence comes from other states since Alaska has not
had an opportunity to conduct much of its own research yet.
MS. NADEAU said her concern with HB 4 revolves around two
programs that Akeela has taken over from other organizations;
these organizations had to stop participating because they could
not afford to continue providing services for the state. She
said that small nonprofits should not be put in the position of
subsidizing the state. She noted that she had advised her
supervisor to refuse the three-year contract offered by the
state for Mat-Su because Akeela was already subsidizing that
program for the state. Of Akeela's four ISAT programs, not a
single one breaks even financially; Akeela has to use funds from
other sources to support treatment programs in the prison
system. She said she would advocate for Akeela to apply for the
contracts coming up in the spring, but only with a reasonable
dollar figure. Ms. Nadeau commented that there not been any
increases in [funding for] substance abuse treatment within the
prison system since 1993. By comparison, halfway houses have
had an increase of as much a 60 percent in their day-cost
[funding] since 1996. She added that the DOC had asked for a
$200,000 increment for treatment programs, but the House Finance
Committee turned down that request.
MS. NADEAU said her final point was that there is a broad body
of interest in the issue of substance abuse, principally,
alcohol abuse, because that is the drug of choice in Alaska. To
illustrate her point she mentioned other legislation regarding
alcohol issues currently before other committees. She suggested
that the legislature take the same approach that was taken
regarding child-wellness proposals, which was to take a holistic
approach in order to come up with a sensible solution. She
added that the demand for social workers, judges, and case
managers will never be reduced without first reducing substance
abuse. Too often, the funding is allocated to the symptoms,
rather than the cause of the problem.
CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that should HB 4 pass with the [funding]
component intact, the money will go directly to mandated
treatment programs.
Number 2114
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented that in his experience, treatment
programs appear to be "revolving doors"; the patterns in the
lives of substance abusers whom he has known do not seem to be
changed by treatment. He said he wanted to have more assurance
that treatment does work. He offered that he knew of more
people who were not helped by treatment than people who were
helped.
MS. NADEAU responded that perhaps that was due in part to the
fact that when treatment is successful, the person is not heard
about again; the people that fail the treatment programs
continue to be a problem for society. She noted that most of
the people she knows, who have successfully moved on with their
lives after going through a treatment program, do not often talk
about it. Statistically, those people are accounted for, but
not on an anecdotal basis.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that the issue of coercion carries
with it a "not if, but when" connotation. Once a conviction
takes place, there is a very legitimate reason to mandate
treatment. He added that he appreciated hearing the report that
the private businesses that provide treatment are becoming weary
of providing services to the state without reimbursement.
Number 2262
JOE MURDY, Co-Chair, DUI Prevention Task Force, said that HB 4
accomplishes a lot of the recommendations brought forth by the
task force. He added that he supports HB 4, 100 percent. He
noted, however, that the appropriate resources must also be
provided in order to accomplish the goals set forth in HB 4.
Furthermore, that treatment, in comparison to jail time, is an
important part of the overall solution; nevertheless, he did
advocate jail time in order to teach offenders a lesson. He
explained that 80 percent of first-time offenders do not re-
offend. He also said that according to a national statistic,
the average person drives drunk 80 times before being caught.
MR. MURDY offered that if first-time and second-time offenders
can be placed into treatment programs, it would go a long way
towards solving the problems caused by drunken drivers. He
acknowledged that it would cost money, and suggested that the
liquor industry, the state, and the communities should all
contribute towards funding. He also suggested offering
treatment providers low-interest loans, and changing local
zoning boundaries so that businesses could expand more easily.
MR. MURDY, on the point of mandated treatment, said that it is
possible to mandate treatment; if a person had to prove that he
or she had attended a 60-day treatment program, then, after the
60 days, the person might not be completely cured but the idea
would be set, and eventually treatment would work. He said that
from his own personal experience, mandatory treatment works.
[On the issue of funding], he suggested the committee consider
what a person's life was worth when he or she gets killed by a
drunken driver.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES commented that the state currently spends
more than it takes in, and asked Mr. Murdy if he had any
solutions.
TAPE 01-27, SIDE B
Number 2474
MR. MURDY suggested an increase in alcohol taxes, and taking an
offender's permanent fund dividend (PFD) to pay for treatment.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES countered that enactment of those
suggestions would only provide small amounts of additional
income to cover state services. She said she was looking for
suggestions for additional income to match both what is being
spent on all state services, and the additional services that
citizens want.
MR. MURDY suggested implementing a state income tax or a state
sales tax. He agreed that the public always says it does not
want either of those taxes, but public officials must come
forward and create mechanisms to increase income so that state
services can continue.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he had inferred from a Republican
majority-sponsored poll that the public does support a head tax
on cruise ships, as well as an alcohol tax.
MR. MURDY, in response to questions, said that the Municipality
of Anchorage pays for its own prosecutors of misdemeanants,
furnishes the Sixth Avenue "jail," and has always been proactive
with regard to [substance abuse] treatment. He also explained
that the task force had presented approximately 21 points in its
report, and that HB 4 covered most of those points. He noted
that the wellness court concept is an excellent tool because it
puts treatment participants under the supervision of a judge.
He finalized by saying he was willing to pay [taxes] in order to
ensure the continuance of state services.
Number 2203
CRISTY WILLER TILDEN, Program Director, Alcohol and Drug Abuse
Services, Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation, spoke in support
of HB 4. She went on to say that the Bristol Bay Area Health
Corporation serves an area the size of Ohio, and is probably the
only organization that provides treatment and prevention
services in the Bristol Bay area. She viewed HB 4 as a
mechanism that would expand [the corporation's] workload, which
is something she is happy to have happen; she added that [the
corporation] would like to eventually work itself out of
business [with regard to its Alcohol and Drug Abuse Services].
[The corporation] is happy to take on more clients, and she
noted that having access to clients while they are incarcerated
would give [the corporation] more opportunities to provide
services. She explained that [the corporation] currently serves
the contract jail located in Dillingham with weekly groups, and
has clients through other existing treatment and ASAP programs.
MS. TILDEN said that [the corporation] would like to expand
services, but the state has "flat-funded" [the corporation] for
at least the last 13 years. With the cost-of-living increases,
[the corporation] has had to shut down some of its treatment
services for up to a month and a half because of an inability to
pay counselors. She expressed concern that the ASAP office in
Dillingham might have to close; over time, state funding has
decreased to the point that only a third of the costs are being
reimbursed. She noted that the Indian Health Service is
currently subsidizing a large portion of those costs. In
addition, local revenues from the area's hospital have also been
used as a funding source. There is local support for the
programs, but there is a lack of money with which to continue
them. She added that in reference to the aforementioned
taxation suggestions, she, too, was willing to pay.
MS. TILDEN offered the argument that it was a case of paying now
for treatment and prevention - accessing offenders as early as
possible while they are in jail - or paying a great deal more
later, for the increased services associated with long-term drug
and alcohol abuse. She referred to a report called "Shoveling
Up: the Impact of Substance Abuse on State Budgets," and said
that it indicated that for every $100 burden on Alaska's public
funds related to substance abuse problems, only $4.98 went
towards prevention, treatment, and research, while $95.02 went
towards the judicial system, the Division of Family and Youth
Services (DFYS), and all the other services that are invoked by
a lack of initial treatment. She added that the report
suggested, as a partial solution, that states require treatment
for individuals convicted of alcohol- and drug-related traffic
violations, as well as for any substance-abusing state
employees.
Number 2048
MS. TILDEN also noted that the report mentioned that coerced
treatment was as effective as voluntary treatment. The threat
of incarceration or loss of benefits can provide the needed
incentive to move toward recovery. She said she had found, in
her program, that virtually everyone is coerced by some factor.
Whether it is court-, spousal-, employer-, or health-inspired
coercion, specific pressures are brought to bear on the
offender, which causes the offender to seek help in the form of
treatment.
MS. TILDEN described how the rural ASAP program worked and made
some comparisons to the ASAP program in Anchorage. She said in
both instances there is one administrator who serves the region.
That administrator is responsible for taking court referrals,
running a brief screening device on those referrals, referring
them to the appropriate treatment program, and following up on
recommendations made by clinical staff. She said she thought
that there was $27,000 sent to [the rural ASAP] office every
year, but that amount doesn't even begin to pay for a third of a
person's salary and office costs. She added that the
administrator also tracks the successful follow-up of
recommendations, and provides court and criminal history on the
program's clients. The rural ASAP program is a
tracking/screening/monitoring function, just as it is in
Anchorage, but with much less support and personnel.
MS. TILDEN explained that the corporation receives funds from
the Indian Health Service and then uses those funds to provide
financial support to programs, one of which is the ASAP program.
So, indirectly, the ASAP program receives funding from the
Indian Health Service, in addition to funding from other local
revenue sources such as the hospital.
Number 1185
DONNA R. GALBREATH, M.D., noted that she is a doctor in
Fairbanks, and said she was speaking on behalf of herself and
her patients. She added that she was from Mentasta, Alaska, and
was half Athabascan. She explained that alcoholism is a huge
problem in Alaska - doubling the national rates - and is higher
amongst the Alaskan Native people. She said that because she is
a physician who works with Alaskan Native people, she works
directly with [alcoholism-related] problems every day. She
reported that she was coming to [the committee] from the "battle
zone"; she works with people who come in [to her facility]
intoxicated, and for whom [treatment] beds are not available.
Thus she has to place them in the hospital, and sometimes has to
resort to using restraining devices, both physical and chemical.
She communicated her thanks to the committee for hearing HB 4;
she said she thought it was a wonderful idea. She noted,
however, that from her perspective, HB 4 represented just "the
tip of the iceberg." She added that while the issue of drunk
driving gets people's attention, the problem of alcoholism is
much bigger. She emphasized that the focus should be on the
disease of alcoholism.
DR. GALBREATH acknowledged that funding is an ongoing issue, but
she suggested that it is important to keep looking at the "big
picture." She noted that it is hard to keep the big picture in
mind when working with individuals and their family members. On
the point of cost, she said she would guess that "detoxing" a
patient can cost anywhere from $5,000 to $20,000. She also
acknowledged that for some people, [the detoxification process]
is a revolving door, and for these people the costs are
astronomical. Dr. Galbreath predicted that if those people can
be caught with a DWI and placed in a treatment program, long-
term costs can be decreased. She mentioned that [alcoholism]
currently costs the state $243 million, and that estimate did
not take into account the price paid by families and
communities.
Number 1742
DR. GALBREATH described examples of some of her male patients
who have been in the prison system for alcohol-related offenses
but did not receive any alcohol treatment while they were
incarcerated. She explained that those men come to her and say
that they "want to do right," they want to have a good life,
they want to get back with their kids, they want to find a
partner, they want to make amends to their families, but they
are unable to because there is not any support for them,
especially in the rural areas. She added that sometimes these
men come to her and say they want to work but they are unable to
get their licenses back. Dr. Galbreath warned that there were a
lot of little things to look at that constitute the big picture.
On another point, she said that she thought that coercion works.
She gave an example of having filled out commitment papers for a
pregnant patient who was drunk at the time of admission.
Ultimately, though the commitment papers were dropped, the
patient did receive treatment, was able to successfully complete
treatment, and is still sober to date, eight years later.
DR. GALBREATH said, on the point of the revolving door, that
that is an ongoing issue and always would be, and that although
she did not have any great answers for that problem, she had
faith in people; every time someone gets "hit" with a piece of
knowledge during treatment, it builds upon itself, and the hope
is that the person will survive long enough to become sober.
Any addiction takes a long time to overcome. She ventured that
everyone in the [committee] room was addicted to something -
coffee, cigarettes, behaviors - and said it takes many attempts
to change.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN expressed his concern about the number of
times a person goes through the revolving door; he asked how
much of the state's resources should be expended on what could
prove to be a hopeless case. He inquired whether there were any
statistics that would help determine the point at which someone
could not be helped. He added that he says in his heart that he
never wants to give up on anybody, but as a manager of a public
purse, he wants to know where to "draw the line."
DR. GALBREATH acknowledged that was a very difficult issue; she
said that for some people treatment works the first time
through, for others it can take five or six times, and for still
other people it takes twenty times. She said that she would not
want to be the person drawing the line because she was out in
the field taking care of those people, and if she did not have
access to any treatment facilities to place them in, those
people would go either into her hospital or into the DOC system.
It came down to "cost shifting." She added that in looking at
the big picture, money has to be spent now; even though the
costs are horribly expensive, she predicted that the long-term
savings of breaking the cycle of addiction would be incredible.
She noted that even though she calls HB 4 a "Band-aid" approach
because it just focuses on drunk driving, if people can be
caught and placed into treatment, they can become a role models
when they go back to their families and communities. Because
helping even one person can make such a big difference, she said
she did not think limits could be placed [on the number of times
a person goes into treatment].
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN equated it with trying to clean up an oil
spill; 98 percent can be cleaned up for "X" amount of dollars,
but ten times that amount will be spent on cleaning up the last
2 percent. He said the resources were finite, and he was
looking for ways to quantify how many times, generally speaking,
a person would go through treatment before it was determined
that treatment was not going to work for that person.
Number 1385
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER asked Dr. Galbreath if, as a doctor, she
found it easier for people to quit drinking or to quit smoking.
DR. GALBREATH responded that it was easier to quit drinking.
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER noted that he had quit smoking and thus was
familiar with the "revolving door." He added that the use of
[nicotine] patches and gum helped him quit. He said he
understood that there were now medications that help curb, or
even kill, the desire for alcohol. He inquired of Dr. Galbreath
if she had ever prescribed those types of drugs, and if so,
whether she found that those medications worked.
DR. GALBREATH explained that those medications, such as
Naltrexone, worked if the person was also in some type of
treatment program and had appropriate follow-up care. She noted
that through a small pilot program in the "Tanana Chiefs" area,
a lot of people were placed in treatment and given Naltrexone.
She added that she was unable to quote statistics because the
pilot program took place eight years ago, but Naltrexone worked.
She also noted there was a national study taking place in order
to quantify the results more.
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER asked if Naltrexone was expensive.
An unidentified member of the audience said that one-month's
worth of Naltrexone cost $100 at [Costco Wholesale Warehouse]
("Costco").
DR. GALBREATH, in response to questions by Representative
Rokeberg, explained that she was only peripherally involved in
the aforementioned pilot program because she was located in
Fairbanks at the time. She was the physician collaborator, and
all the patients that were involved in the program were her
patients. She also explained that she did use Naltrexone in her
practice, though if a person uses it without the benefit of also
being in a treatment program, there is a greater potential for
relapse. She said that she normally tries to get a person who
comes to her with a drinking problem into treatment instead of
just prescribing Naltrexone. She normally uses Naltrexone as a
part of the treatment program, although there are circumstances
where she will provide just the Naltrexone.
Number 1162
CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that to his understanding, initially, at
the Alaska Native Medical Center (ANMC) in Anchorage, there was
resistance to the use of Naltrexone. Since then, however, the
leading physician in that area has become a great proponent of
Naltrexone, and has been doing some studies on dosage.
DR. GALBREATH said that there was a study going on in the state,
although she could not confirm if it was being conducted by
ANMC.
Number 1143
JANET McCABE, Chair, Partners for Downtown Progress, added that
Dr. Jay Collier (ph) was prescribing [Naltrexone] as part of
[the program at] the primary care center, before sending people
to treatment.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said that Dr. Galbreath's point
regarding cost shifting was an excellent one. He remarked, "We
either pay here, or we pay in the prisons, or we pay in the
hospitals; we pay somewhere." He asked Dr. Galbreath what she
meant when she said "detox somebody."
DR. GALBREATH explained that when people come off of alcohol,
they withdraw from it, especially if they've been drinking every
day for months on end. The longer that persons have been
drinking, the harder they detox. Sometimes the effects [of
detox] are mild - shakiness, bad dreams, blood-pressure and
heart-rate increases - and those people are usually treated with
librium (ph) and sometimes adavan (ph); if the effects [of
detox] reach the point of delirium tremens (DTs) -
hallucinations - then those people are put in four-point
restraints and given enough medication to ensure sleep. People
who have DTs and are hallucinating have no idea where they are
or what they are doing, and they can harm themselves and others.
Thus treating patients who are detoxing involves a continuum of
treatment.
Number 1035
CINDY CASHEN, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), Juneau
Chapter, said she was a victim of a drunk driver. She informed
the committee that members of MADD wanted to pay [tribute] to
Representative James. Ms. Cashen explained that today was the
fifth year [anniversary] of the first day of her sobriety. She
added that she went in [to treatment] under coercion - she did
not want to go, she did not think that she was an alcoholic;
someone needed to push her into [treatment] - and it worked for
her. Ms. Cashen further explained that her perception that she
was living in a safe community changed on April 19, [2001], when
a drunk driver killed her father, Ladd Macaulay. She noted that
HB 4 will change the DWI BAC (blood alcohol concentration)
[limit] from .10 to .08. Laboratory and test-track research
shows that virtually all drivers are substantially impaired at
.08 BAC with regard to judgment; dividing attention; and
critical driving skills such as braking, steering, and lane-
changing. According to studies, performance decrements in some
of these tasks are as high as 60-70 percent at .08 BAC.
MS. CASHEN reported there was a 12 percent reduction in alcohol-
related fatalities in California in 1990, which was the year the
.08 BAC limit and an administrative license revocation law went
into effect. The decrease in alcohol-related fatalities
occurred at both high and low BAC levels, which meant that even
chronic drunk drivers with BAC levels of .20 or greater were
affected by the .08 BAC limit. She reminded the committee that
Alaska has a high population of chronic drunk drivers.
Number 0869
MS. CASHEN communicated that MADD supports HB 4 with regard to
vehicle impoundment; data from studies done in Ohio, California,
and Manitoba, Canada, have demonstrated that vehicle impoundment
reduces the number of subsequent DWI offenses. Mothers Against
Drunk Driving supports the increase in the look-back provisions
of HB 4, whereby a person who has two DWIs within ten years,
instead of five years, will be sentenced and convicted as a
felon on the third DWI. She added that by taking the chronic
drunk driver off the road and placing him or her into intensive
treatment programs, HB 4 will effectively eliminate many of
[Alaska's] drunk-driving fatalities.
MS. CASHEN said that MADD realizes that changing the BAC limit
to .08 is not the only answer to [the problem of] drunk driving,
but [the change to] .08 will be a significant factor in
educating the public on the dangers of driving while impaired.
She informed the committee that the combination of changing the
BAC limit to .08, vehicle impoundment, a longer look-back time
on offenders' driving records, and intensive treatment programs
has already been proven in several states to lower the [rate of]
drunk-driving injuries and fatalities.
MS. CASHEN, in conclusion, related the following facts from last
summer: the person who killed her father and Martin Richard on
April 19 had a record of drunk driving; Donna Hobson was
severely injured on June 24 by a drunk driver with two prior
convictions; Jessie Withrow was killed on July 3 by a drunk
driver with six previous DWI convictions; and on July 4 a drunk
driver with a revoked license and five prior convictions struck
and seriously injured two girls. Ms. Cashen explained that
these examples were only some of the tragedies that occurred
last year, and she was bringing them to the attention of the
committee because, had the provisions of HB 4 been in effect,
these deaths [and injuries] might have been prevented. The
people mentioned are all victims, as are their families,
friends, and colleagues. Another point she urged the committee
to keep in mind is that the drunk driver also brings to the
table an additional "tribe" of victims, that of the drunk
driver's family, who now have to live with the fact that someone
they love is now a murderer or has severely injured someone.
Ms. Cashen said that by putting the provisions of HB 4 into
effect (.08 BAC limit, vehicle impoundment, increases in the
look-back provision, and requiring treatment) there is great
likelihood of lowering not only drunk-driving fatalities, but
also all the other serious injuries involved with alcoholism.
Number 0602
GERRY KNASIAK, Public Member, Advisory Board on Alcoholism and
Drug Abuse, said she was from Ketchikan, which she said she
believes has the dubious distinction of having the largest
consumption of alcohol in the state of Alaska. She also said
she supports HB 4, and she commended [the legislature] for
creating it. However, she wanted to remind the committee that
HB 4 addresses only a small part of the picture. In Alaska, so
many resources are devoted to the indicators of the problem
rather than the cause - the cause being the disease of
alcoholism. She noted that someone had already made the point
that there would never be enough counselors or social workers
until the cause was addressed. On the point of cost, she
explained that the Advisory Board had once considered doing a
study on the cost of doing nothing; however, the board did not
have the funds to proceed with the study. She surmised that had
the study been done, it would have been very illuminating
because the cost of doing nothing is horrendous. She said:
Until we really bite the bullet and face the issue, we
are going to continue addressing those things that are
indicators. We can continue to build prisons, we can
continue to take children away from their mothers, we
can continue having children who are fetal alcohol
syndrome (FAS). We can continue doing all those
things, and addressing those with resources that are
so hard to come by. It is so painful to see programs
that work having to cut down to a nub, and actually,
in some cases, just fold. So the question is, when do
you pay for it. I submit you either pay for it now or
you pay for it later.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Ms. Knasiak to elaborate on her
comments about programs that have worked but which have been cut
back.
MS. KNASIAK said that the DOC had given a presentation earlier
that day about programs that were working but which were cut
back.
Number 0403
SARAH WILLIAMS, Substance Abuse Program Coordinator, Inmate
Programs, Division of Institutions, Department of Corrections,
explained that the Sixth Avenue Correctional Center had a 20-
hour/week program and it has been cut back to a 5-hour/week
program. She added that that facility was a key point of
intervention, doing over half the bookings in the DOC each year.
It provided intervention for pregnant women who were drinking,
using intravenous (IV) drugs, or otherwise participating in
risky behavior with regard to HIV/AIDS. The DOC had to cut the
program down because it could not pay the vendors enough to
provide the services.
MS. KNASIAK added, on the point of whether treatment works, that
when she was living in Juneau she had attended "birthdays" of
people who were in recovery and celebrating sobriety, and she
found it to be a most touching and uplifting experience. And
while she, herself, did not have a drinking problem, she did not
know of anyone whose life has not been touched by alcoholism to
some degree.
Number 0250
AGNES SWEETSIR said she is Athabascan; having been born in
Tanana, she now lives in Galena, where she grew up. She
explained that she was a social worker for 14 years at the
Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS). She noted that
during an informal study she had done on her own caseload, 94
percent of the families that she served were in the system
because of alcoholism. She added that she resigned her position
about a year ago, primarily because she was frustrated with the
lack of available treatment programs in her area. She said she
hoped that as a private citizen she would be able to effect some
change in the amount of resources available for alcoholism
treatment. Her goal is to be able to help the people of Alaska,
and, primarily, the children. She noted that she has been
serving as a volunteer on the Advisory Board on Alcoholism and
Drug Abuse for the last few months. She also said that she,
herself, has been devastated by alcoholism; many members of her
large extended family are addicted to alcohol, as well as other
substances. She has had three brothers commit suicide as a
result of their addictions.
TAPE 01-28, SIDE A
Number 0001
MS. SWEETSIR explained that one of her brothers had sought
treatment diligently but no beds were available for him. Two
weeks after he was released from the hospital in Fairbanks he
still had not found any treatment facility that had room for
him. He called his wife to tell her how much he loved her, the
children, and the grandchildren; he related that he thought he
was never going to get treatment, that he was causing people too
much pain, and that maybe he was not worth [the trouble] anyway.
Ms. Sweetsir said that her brother was a man with a lot of
potential, and she surmised that if he had had treatment, he
would not have hung himself.
MS. SWEETSIR noted that the day after her brother committed
suicide, a cousin of hers died of what Ms. Sweetsir said she
believed to be an alcohol-related illness. Since then, there
have been sixteen funerals in her area. The last funeral was
for a two-month-old infant who was shot by someone under the
influence of alcohol and possibly other drugs. She added that
the boy who shot the baby is a distant relative of hers, and she
was aware of the fact that his family had tried diligently for
years to get him into treatment, but to no avail.
MS. SWEETSIR emphasized that treatment has to be made available
if the cycle [of alcoholism] is to be broken. She added that in
her family, which she said she thinks is representative of many
Native families and Native communities, she and her sisters have
to try to find solutions for their nieces and nephews who are at
risk of dying because they are left without fathers as a result
of alcoholism. She said that it is very painful to have to
watch and not be able to do anything to help.
MS. SWEETSIR urged the committee to do all it could to make
treatment available. She said HB 4 is only the first step; the
subject of treatment has to be kept on the table in order to
effect a change. On the topic of paying for services, Ms.
Sweetsir said she was willing to pay, and in fact, she was
already paying dearly every day. She said her family is
devastated and that they live in fear every day - of the
aforementioned sixteen funerals, over half of them were
alcoholism-related deaths. Again, she said she was pleading
with the committee to keep the [subject of treatment for
alcoholism] on the table. She added that according to
statistics, one of her four sons will die by the age of 25, and
she said that that was a sobering and painful thought; she works
every day to try to make a difference in addressing the problems
[of alcoholism]. She asked that the committee help by providing
the funding and making treatment available for people.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that the topic of treatment kept
coming up, and if HB 4 goes into law, then there will be a
higher demand for treatment. He asked Ms. Sweetsir for examples
of areas where the growth of treatment centers can be encouraged
by the legislature.
MS. SWEETSIR responded that she believed that alcoholism was a
family disease, and thus needed to be treated as such. She
added that in her experience, treatment [for alcoholism] in
Alaska is largely unavailable. She had been looking into the
prospect of expanding into family treatment, where many people
and many generations can be affected. Also, she said she
thought it would be nice to be able to bring treatment to the
people in their homes, so that all of the family can be treated.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he appreciated that input. He noted
that he was in favor of coercive treatment, but it was a matter
of where and when [to institute it]. He commented that when
offenders get treatment during incarceration, they can be
taught, but when offenders leave the correctional facility there
is not much available in the way of either accountability or
follow-up treatment. Thus, he added, not only will there be a
cost to implement [HB 4], but there will also be a need for
treatment facilities.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he supports the concept of treatment,
but he was not sure that secular treatment would be as effective
as faith-based treatment because there is a part of the spirit
that is wounded and which must also be made whole. He suggested
that perhaps "they" could interface with President Bush's
proposed faith-based treatment programs.
Number 0730
ORIE WILLIAMS commented that he was 15 years sober as of today.
He said he related to the disease of alcoholism as a cancer,
probably worse than a cancer. He noted that the disease affects
every family member [of an alcoholic]. He said that HB 4 starts
to address the problem, but when the committee is asking the
question "What family are you really from?" he pointed out that
the answer is "The family of Alaska," and when asking what
portion of the family do you kick out to make the family feel
better, the answer is "none." If a family member is suffering
from some other debilitating disease such as cancer or diabetes,
the family spends all available resources on that person, and
that person is given the support he or she needs.
MR. WILLIAMS noted that for too long in the frontier state of
Alaska, the message has been that to work hard and play hard
(including drinking hard) meant that a person was a man. He
said that he has unending respect for people who, unlike
himself, can sit down and have a social drink without causing
chaos. He noted that he certainly could not just go have one
glass of wine - maybe just one bottle or one case would be more
like it for him. He added that the craving [for alcohol] does
not go away. The aches, pains, and chaos are still with him
too; they are just in remission. On the topic of "blackouts,"
he said he remembers all too often, after having driven for
miles and miles, "waking up" to discover he had driven past his
destination. He shared one example of driving from Cantwell,
Alaska, past Nenana, waking up in a gravel pit, turning around
and going in the wrong direction, all without remembering the
trip itself. He also said that he has been an alcoholic since
high school, and has never spoken about it in public before
today. He mentioned being thankful that nobody gave up on him
over the years. He also mentioned having two DWIs and suicidal
feelings. He referred to the tendency of parents to come to the
rescue of their children [who are caught DWI] in order to help
their kids avoid the booking process so that they don't have to
wake up in jail. He advocated that first-time offenders should
be treated harshly so that there would not be further offenses.
Number 1018
MR. WILLIAMS mentioned that he and his wife pay $40,000 a year
in federal taxes without the benefit of knowing what the money
is used for; he added that he would be happy to pay a state
income tax [to help fund services]. He related some of his
personal experiences with his battle with alcoholism. He said
that sometimes people have to fall deep enough into the "sewer"
before they decide they don't want to "be flushed one more
time," and he posed the question, "How valuable is our society
if we don't help the weakest member of our family?" He added
that families and towns come together to bury older members of
the community, but too often in Alaska it is the older members
of the communities that are burying the youth [because of
alcohol-related problems].
MR. WILLIAMS mentioned that the topic of aftercare had not been
broached much. He said that one of the things that helped him
was mandatory aftercare for 11 months; he had to report back to
the court and prove that he had completed the aftercare program.
He said that he thought that follow-up [treatment] was critical.
He commented that substance abuse and spousal abuse were
flooding Alaska's court systems. On the point of DWIs, he noted
that during the course of his 20 years of drinking, he should
have gotten over 1,100 DWIs, even if he had only been drinking
on weekends, which was not the case. He spoke again about his
experiences with blackouts, and stressed the point that
treatment works, and that it worked for him - although he
ventured that some people could argue the point of his life's
worth. He added that without treatment and aftercare, he would
not be here today.
Number 1279
MR. WILLIAMS again stressed the point that it is important to
fund treatment and aftercare programs. And even though people
will complain about having to pay an extra tax on alcohol, he
suggested that there was not one person who could not afford to
pay it - the person with the disease of alcoholism will find the
money, regardless. He said he wished that money from an alcohol
tax could go directly to fund treatment, but he acknowledged
that instead it would go into the general fund. Nevertheless,
he added, the legislature can fund treatment indirectly by
passing and funding HB 4, which would mandate treatment.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN thanked Mr. Williams for sharing his
personal experiences.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ thanked Mr. Williams for reminding the
committee, "You can't leave people behind; the measure of who we
are as a state depends on our ability to stop and help those
people who can't help themselves, because, if we persist, good
things will happen."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Mr. Williams to contact him at a
later date to discuss the topic of aftercare.
CHAIR ROKEBERG asked Mr. Williams to provide information
regarding the cost and availability of treatment in the Bethel
area.
MS. McCABE noted that HB 4 and [HB 172] go well together. She
said she hoped that [HB 172] will address, at the district court
level, the people with alcohol-related problems before those
people harm others and further destroy their own lives. She
also said she hoped that [HB 172] could be set up to include
people with a third felony DUI in the court [created by HB 172].
MS. McCABE, on the point of Naltrexone use, said that Judge
Wanamaker includes Naltrexone use as a component of treatment,
and it has been found to be a very effective drug because it
takes the "driving edge" off somebody who is trying to get rid
of an addiction, thus enabling that person to see the rewards of
sobriety. She suggested that if the list in Section [29] could
include pharmaceutical treatment in conjunction with
"psycho/social" treatment - whereby a physician could prescribe
the drug - then, for $100/month, a person's treatment would be
enhanced.
Number 1577
MELINDA FREEMON, Executive Director, Salvation Army Clitheroe
Center (Clitheroe Center), noted that she was also a clinical
consultant for the Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association. She
said she appreciated the [legislature's] comprehensive work
towards eliminating the increasing problems of alcoholism and
drug abuse in the state. She added that during her 22 years in
the social services field, she had yet to see a family that had
not, in some way, been affected or devastated by alcohol abuse.
She encouraged the committee to provide sufficient funding for
the fiscal notes, and to support the entire budget. She said
there is a need to increase the DOC's provision regarding
services, because Clitheroe Center subsidizes its contracts with
the DOC in order to provide treatment for incarcerated men and
women. [Clitheroe Center continues to subsidize DOC] because it
has been proven that providing treatment to someone who is
incarcerated works. She also noted that [Clitheroe Center] has
a long waiting list; [Clitheroe Center] did not apply for the
"drug court's" money because it was not fiscally sound to do so.
MS. FREEMON stated that coerced treatment does work. She said
that she was very skeptical [of that fact] before she went into
the substance-abuse field, but she is now a proponent, even, of
involuntary commitments to substance abuse treatment. What is
needed with criminal clients is to help them restructure their
thinking patterns; the clients don't have to reach bottom, they
just need to be shown that they will reach bottom if they don't
change their thinking patterns. She also said that she wanted
to encourage the committee to look at the broad issue and work
collaboratively with the other divisions and departments; no one
would have known [beforehand] that increased funding for the
Division of Family and Youth Services could be obtained, and the
same thing is possible for drug and alcohol treatment with [the
legislature's] effort.
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER asked what the waiting list was for the
Clitheroe Center.
MS. FREEMON responded that the outpatient treatment waiting list
was approximately 35 people, the residential treatment waiting
list was between 20 to 30 people - [Clitheroe Center] needs more
beds for women and children - and [Clitheroe Center] also
maintains waiting lists for all of its programs. She also
explained that it takes approximately two to four weeks to get
though a waiting list of 35 people. With regard to funding the
programs, she said that [Clitheroe Center] taps every resource
of the client that it can; it requires payment, even if it is
only $5/month; it taps the PFDs of every individual client; and
it pursues clients with its collections department quite
heavily. Another resource is the alcohol excise tax, as well as
every other arena where the user pays the money. Although she
said she considers "If you use it, you pay for it" to be a
philosophical statement, she said she thought individuals who
are using alcohol to "this degree" need to be paying in order to
help alleviate the symptoms and problems that occur as a result
of alcohol abuse.
CHAIR ROKEBERG asked if there was a limit to the attachment of a
PFD check.
MS. FREEMON answered that up to 80 percent of a PFD check could
be attached. She also said she would provide the committee with
brochures and other handouts that detail the types and costs of
the programs [Clitheroe Center] offers.
MS. NADEAU added that most organizations "cap" their waiting
lists, because it was not reasonable to keep adding names when
[organizations] won't be able to get to those names.
Number 1889
CHERYL MANN, Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, said
she is a professor of human services at the University of Alaska
Anchorage (UAA). With regard to the annual report produced by
the Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, she explained
that part of her findings were that Alaska Native women were
likely to be: older, single, and unemployed; to have high
school (or lower) educational levels; to live in a village; to
be addicted to alcohol; to have been to treatment previously;
and to be court-ordered to treatment more frequently that non-
Native women. She said she wanted to encourage the committee to
ensure treatment accessibility, particularly for women, and
women with children. She also noted that in order to provide
treatment services, programs had to be staffed by people who
were trained and knowledgeable about addictions and the dynamics
of alcoholism and drug abuse. Thus, workforce development
efforts had to be in place in order to train [future staff]; as
[the legislature] looks at the funding for substance abuse
treatment, she suggested [the legislature] should also consider
taking steps to provide an adequate workforce. She closed her
testimony by saying she was pleased to see [the legislature] was
taking a more holistic approach to the very complex problem [of
alcohol and drug abuse].
[HB 4 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1988
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:20 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|