05/07/2003 03:38 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
May 7, 2003
3:38 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Tom Anderson, Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Representative Carl Gatto
Representative Norman Rokeberg
Representative Harry Crawford
Representative David Guttenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Real Estate Commission
Bradley J. Fluetsch, CFA, - Juneau
Barbara Parker-Ramesey - Anchorage
David B. Somers - Fairbanks
- CONFIRMATIONS ADVANCED
Z. Kent Sullivan, Esq. - Fairbanks
- CONFIRMATION HEARING POSTPONED
Alaska Labor Relations Agency
Colleen E. Scanlon - Ketchikan
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Board of Barbers and Hairdressers
Charlette Lushin - Fairbanks
Joylene A. Marrs - Anchorage
- CONFIRMATIONS ADVANCED
Board of Chiropractic Examiners
David J. Mulholland, D.C. - Anchorage
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
State Medical Board
Robert A. Breffeilh, M.D. - Juneau
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Board of Nursing
Mary H. Weymiller, LPN - Fairbanks
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Board of Pharmacy
William R. Altland, R.Ph. - Craig
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Board of Psychologist and Psychological Associate Examiners
Lorin L. Bradbury, Ph.D. - Bethel
John A. Miller, Ph.D. - Chugiak
- CONFIRMATIONS ADVANCED
Board of Veterinary Examiners
Steven M. Torrence, D.V.M. - Fairbanks
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
HOUSE BILL NO. 270
"An Act relating to the licensure of pharmacists; and providing
for an effective date."
- MOVED HB 270 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 268
"An Act relating to an exemption for specialty contractors under
the laws regulating architects, engineers, land surveyors, and
landscape architects."
- MOVED HB 268 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 32
"An Act relating to a health insurance uniform prescription drug
information card; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 32(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 285
"An Act adopting the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act;
repealing certain statutes relating to electronic records and
electronic signatures; amending Rule 402, Alaska Rules of
Evidence; and providing for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 272
"An Act relating to motor vehicle dealers."
- BILL HEARING POSTPONED TO 5/9/03
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 270
SHORT TITLE:PHARMACIST LICENSING
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)DAHLSTROM
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
04/15/03 0986 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
04/15/03 0986 (H) HES, L&C
04/24/03 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/24/03 (H) Moved Out of Committee
MINUTE(HES)
04/25/03 1124 (H) HES RPT 4DP
04/25/03 1124 (H) DP: CISSNA, SEATON, WOLF,
WILSON
04/25/03 1124 (H) FN1: ZERO(CED)
05/05/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
05/05/03 (H) Heard & Held
05/05/03 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/07/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 268
SHORT TITLE:LICENSING SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)MCGUIRE
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
04/15/03 0985 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
04/15/03 0985 (H) L&C
05/02/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
05/02/03 (H) Heard & Held
05/02/03 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/07/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 32
SHORT TITLE:UNIFORM PRESCRIPTION DRUG CARD
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)COGHILL
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/21/03 0040 (H) PREFILE RELEASED (1/10/03)
01/21/03 0040 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/21/03 0040 (H) L&C, HES
01/29/03 0089 (H) COSPONSOR(S): GRUENBERG
01/31/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
01/31/03 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
02/03/03 0119 (H) COSPONSOR(S): WHITAKER
02/05/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
02/05/03 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
05/07/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
BRADLEY J. FLUETSCH, CFA, Appointee
to the Real Estate Commission
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as Appointee to the Real Estate
Commission.
ROBIN PHILLIPS, Staff
to Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 270, spoke on
behalf of the sponsor, Representative Dahlstrom.
BARRY CHRISTENSEN, R.Ph., Legislative Chair
Alaska Pharmacists Association (AkPhA)
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 270; testified
in support of HB 32.
DONALD J. IVERSON, P.E., Member
State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers, and Land
Surveyors ("the AELS board")
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Indicated that he wished to speak in favor
of HB 268, and responded to questions.
PATRICK H. KALEN, PLS, Member
State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers, and Land
Surveyors ("the AELS board")
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a comment during discussion of HB
268.
HEATH HILYARD, Staff
to Representative Lesil McGuire
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 268, provided a
comment on behalf of the sponsor, Representative McGuire.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 32.
KATIE CAMPBELL, Actuary L/H
Central Office
Division of Insurance
Department of Community & Economic Development (DCED)
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during discussion
of HB 32.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-48, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR TOM ANDERSON called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:38 p.m. Representatives
Anderson, Gatto, Crawford, and Guttenberg were present at the
call to order. Representatives Dahlstrom and Rokeberg arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Number 0060
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the committee would first take up
the governors appointments to the Alaska Labor Relations Agency,
the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers, the Board of Chiropractic
Examiners, the State Medical Board, the Board of Nursing, the
Board of Pharmacy, the Board of Psychologist and Psychological
Associate Examiners, the Real Estate Commission, and the Board
of Veterinary Examiners. He noted that Bradley J. Fluetsch,
appointee to the Real Estate Commission, was present to answer
questions.
Real Estate Commission
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Fluetsch for his background
information and an explanation of why he wanted to serve on the
Real Estate Commission.
Number 0116
BRADLEY J. FLUETSCH, CFA, Appointee to the Real Estate
Commission, relayed that he was a registered investment advisor
with the State of Alaska up until this year; that he has worked
for the Sealaska Corporation and the Alaska Permanent Fund
Corporation; that he has run his own investment advisory firm;
and that as an adjunct lecturer with the University of Alaska
Southeast, he teaches an entry-level finance course. He said
that he volunteered to serve on the Real Estate Commission
because he wished to serve Governor Murkowski.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that he is a licensed real estate
broker, has been so for over 30 years, and takes a keen interest
in real estate issues. After mentioning his proposed
legislation regarding dual agency, he asked Mr. Fluetsch to
comment on that issue.
MR. FLUETSCH said that he did not have any experience with dual
agency specific to real estate, but noted that in the securities
industry, dual agency has been given several black eyes. He
elaborated:
The Association of Investment Management and Research
is the body that I belong to - it is the governing
body. The CFA [chartered financial analyst] is not
handed out easily; there's 18 in the state of Alaska -
there's only 2 native Americans, I'm one of them,
[and] the other works for [the] Sealaska Corporation.
... I don't know agency law specifically as it applies
to real estate, but within the securities industry -
and I know we are different, though real estate is an
asset class ... - full disclosure ... is the wave of
the future. The securities industry has just
absolutely destroyed its credibility, its standing
within the community. And it's through full
disclosure [regarding] relationships and those kinds
of issues that it's going to find itself clean again.
And it will.
At this point ... I'm real sensitive to disclosure
and those types of issues because of what the
securities industry has done, especially as to
relationships. ... Those kinds of issues have severely
damaged our industry - my industry - and so ... that's
sort of clouding my view, and I'd have to look at [any
proposed] legislation specifically and probably speak
to an attorney ... [regarding] the legal issues as to
agency before I could really [present] an opinion. ...
But knowing what I do for a living and its background,
... I do have an idea [that] full disclosure - open,
anything you can tell a client or a person you're
working for - is best.
Number 0490
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG suggested that recent case law has made
the issue of dual agency more complex. He asked whether, in the
securities industry, a person may represent both parties in a
transaction.
MR. FLUETSCH said no, not without disclosure, adding that a
number of those in the securities industry are under
investigation for just such practices.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG again mentioned his proposed legislation
pertaining to the issue of dual agency, adding that there is
some dissension within the real estate community regarding that
issue.
MR. FLUETSCH noted that laws pertaining to securities already
make a distinction between qualified investment buyers and
[those that aren't].
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG indicated that he had no more questions
for Mr. Fluetsch, and thanked him for being willing to serve on
the Real Estate Commission.
Alaska Labor Relations Agency
Board of Barbers and Hairdressers
Board of Chiropractic Examiners
State Medical Board
Board of Nursing
Board of Pharmacy
Board of Psychologist and Psychological Associate Examiners
Board of Veterinary Examiners
Number 0783
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO made a motion to advance from committee the
nominations of the following appointees: Colleen E. Scanlon to
the Alaska Labor Relations Agency; Charlette Lushin and Joylene
A. Marrs to the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; David J.
Mulholland, D.C., to the Board of Chiropractic Examiners; Robert
A. Breffeilh, M.D., to the State Medical Board; Mary H.
Weymiller, LPN, to the Board of Nursing; William R. Altland,
R.Ph., to the Board of Pharmacy; Lorin L. Bradbury, Ph.D., and
John A. Miller, Ph.D., to the Board of Psychologist and
Psychological Associate Examiners; Bradley J. Fluetsch, CFA,
Barbara Parker-Ramesey, and David B. Somers to the Real Estate
Commission; and Steven M. Torrence, D.V.M., to the Board of
Veterinary Examiners.
Number 0974
CHAIR ANDERSON asked whether there were any objections to the
motion. There being none, the confirmations were advanced from
the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
CHAIR ANDERSON, in response to a question, reminded members that
signing the reports regarding appointments to boards and
commissions in no way reflects individual members' approval or
disapproval of the appointees, and that the nominations are
merely forwarded to the full legislature for confirmation or
rejection.
HB 270 - PHARMACIST LICENSING
Number 1067
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 270, "An Act relating to the licensure of
pharmacists; and providing for an effective date."
Number 1085
ROBIN PHILLIPS, Staff to Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Alaska
State Legislature, noted, on behalf of Representative Dahlstrom,
sponsor, that members should now have in their packets copies of
the statutes pertaining to the appeal process for applicants and
licensees who've been denied a license or who've had a license
revoked. She noted that this process is set in statute under
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). In response to a
question regarding whether HB 270 is even necessary, she said:
This bill was brought to us by the Board [of Pharmacy]
and by their legal folks that had come up with the
language. I believe ... its just [to] clarify any
situation that may arise, so that they can deny a
license rather than having to take it back after
they've given the license.
Number 1197
BARRY CHRISTENSEN, R.Ph., Legislative Chair, Alaska Pharmacists
Association (AkPhA), said simply that the AkPhA supports HB 270
because of the need to ensure that those applying for a
pharmacist license are good, qualified applicants.
CHAIR ANDERSON, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 270.
Number 1235
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved to report HB 270 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
note. There being no objection, HB 270 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
HB 268 - LICENSING SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS
Number 1261
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 268, "An Act relating to an exemption for
specialty contractors under the laws regulating architects,
engineers, land surveyors, and landscape architects."
Number 1274
DONALD J. IVERSON, P.E., Member, State Board of Registration for
Architects, Engineers, and Land Surveyors ("the AELS board"),
noted that he is also a consulting engineer in Anchorage. He
relayed that he wished to speak in favor of HB 268, adding that
the AELS board feels that the bill will offer clarity with
regard to what specialty contractors can do.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked for an example of something that
HB 268 would correct.
MR. IVERSON replied:
From what our enforcement officer told us, there are
some contractors in rural communities, more than any
place else, that have been doing complete mechanical -
for example - designs. And the intent of this is to
allow the specialty things like shop drawings for
pieces of equipment that another engineer has reviewed
[or] will review ... Or in the case of an electrical
contractor, [with] let's say a fire alarm system, they
would draw the specifics of it, but the engineer of
record will check and approve that design. It's more
of a clarification; I think the intent has always been
that the complete [designs] of mechanical/electrical
systems, for example, are done by professional
engineers.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether such isn't already
required under state law.
MR. IVERSON indicated that it is.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether contractors that do their
own shop drawings can use "off-the-shelf components."
Number 1414
MR. IVERSON said that they may, and then those shop drawings are
normally sent through to the engineer of record for review and
approval. He added, however, that engineers don't normally get
that far into the specifics of an off-the-shelf piece of
equipment, and "that's why you have this kind of exception." He
explained:
If you take a fire alarm system, for example, every
manufacturer does it slightly differently. And if I
..., as an engineer, were trying to design it, I
couldn't design the specifics of that manufacturer's
equipment because I need a competitive bid - I need
different manufacturers to bid on it. So, when he has
won the bid, if you will, then he sends through the
specifics of his equipment - shop drawings - and then
I would review that and make sure that it is meeting
the life safety codes and the understanding of the
specification.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked how much an electrical contractor
could do with a shop drawing without having an engineering stamp
on it. Where is the line drawn?
MR. IVERSON remarked that that is difficult to say, adding that
the ramifications to the whole building must be considered when
whole-scale changes are made, and that such changes must be made
by an engineer. In response to a question, he remarked that a
"UL-approved switch" is required by other statutes.
Number 1628
PATRICK H. KALEN, PLS, Member, State Board of Registration for
Architects, Engineers, and Land Surveyors ("the AELS board"),
added that the AELS board did not think that HB 268, as
currently worded, interfered with a contractor's ability to
submit shop drawings.
Number 1638
HEATH HILYARD, Staff to Representative Lesil McGuire, Alaska
State Legislature, indicated, on behalf of Representative
McGuire, sponsor, that HB 268 would to some extent limit the
ability of specialty contractors to do original design work of
"that" nature. He mentioned that the Mechanical Contractors of
Alaska, Inc., would be meeting that evening to decide whether to
take an official position on HB 268. He surmised that if anyone
has any concerns about the bill, they could be addressed in the
House Rules Standing Committee.
Number 1700
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG, after noting that he didn't really like
the bill and had concerns about it, moved to report HB 268 out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying zero fiscal note. There being no objection, HB 268
was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee.
HB 32 - UNIFORM PRESCRIPTION DRUG CARD
Number 1754
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 32, "An Act relating to a health insurance
uniform prescription drug information card; and providing for an
effective date."
The committee took an at-ease from 4:10 p.m. to 4:11.
[Not on tape, but taken from the Gavel to Gavel recording on the
Internet, was:
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
paraphrased from his sponsor statement, which, with original
punctuation provided, read:
The intent of HB32 is to have a uniform prescription
card implemented to expedite the amount of time a
pharmacy technician spends gathering necessary
information from the insurance company in order to
process the insurance claim. Pharmacists are spending
a disproportionate amount of time trying to address
reimbursement issues rather than serving the health
care needs of their customers. HB 32 would allow form
more face-to-face care between pharmacists and
patients. It would also minimize confusion, eliminate
unnecessary paperwork, decrease administrative
burdens, and streamline the dispension of prescription
products paid for by third party payors.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL indicated that he'd originally attempted
to outline in statute all the things that would be on a
prescription card, but because there were many things he was
reluctant to have on the card, he'd instead decided to have a
bill that simply said the director shall adopt, by regulation,
uniform prescription drug information cards.]
Number 1790
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG made a motion to adopt the proposed
committee substitute (CS) for HB 32, Version 23-LS0203\D, Ford,
3/5/03, as the work draft. There being no objection, Version D
was before the committee.
Number 1814
BARRY CHRISTENSEN, R.Ph., Legislative Chair, Alaska Pharmacists
Association (AkPhA), said that the AkPhA supports passage of HB
32. He added that although the AkPhA would be more comfortable
if certain items were listed in statute, it realizes that such
is not possible at this time, and so it is trusting that the
director will adopt suitable regulations.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether the original version of HB
32 is similar to legislation sponsored during the prior
legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said it is essentially the same.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG recalled that that legislation was
controversial.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL indicated that those controversial issues
are resolved via Version D. In response to a question, he
relayed that "Aetna" is amenable to Version D.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that one of the problems with
listing in statute the specific things that a card must have on
it is that it would be difficult to make it be both uniform and
flexible.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL concurred, and indicated that Version D
resolves that issue as well.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked why all the interested parties
had not simply sat down with each other and created something
that resolved their concerns.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL suggested that everyone's past attempts
to list and define, in statute, all the necessary terms had met
with failure. He opined that "lining up" all the information in
statute is the wrong approach; thus Version D simply gives the
division the authority to, by regulation, adopt uniform
prescription drug cards, and mandates that it shall do so.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG noted that the legislature has heard a
lot of complaints over the years about the problems associated
with creating, adopting, and changing regulations.
Number 2163
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL pointed out that having something
implemented via regulation instead of via statute is a policy
call the legislature can make. He added that if they really
wanted to wrestle with getting the necessary items listed in
statute to everybody's satisfaction, he would be willing to
undertake that project next year, but adopting Version D this
year will enable [the division] to develop something in the
meantime. He surmised that without the pressure of HB 32, the
division might not even bother with the process of developing a
prescription drug card. On the issue of whether there even
ought to be such a card developed, he relayed that his
constituency is in favor of it.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked whether the information that would be
on a uniform prescription drug card would be his information,
the insurance company's information, or the pharmacy's
information.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL replied: "It would have your name,
insurance information, and prescription information. And that's
actually what we were trying to describe in [the original
version of the bill]."
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD opined that Version D of HB 32 is
heading down the right track, and that the quicker a uniform
prescription drug card is developed, the better.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Katie Campbell whether she would
be the one writing the regulations proposed by Version D.
Number 2290
KATIE CAMPBELL, Actuary L/H, Central Office, Division of
Insurance, Department of Community & Economic Development
(DCED), confirmed that she would be the one writing those
proposed regulations.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Ms. Campbell whether she
anticipates any problems doing so or requires any additional
direction from the legislature.
MS. CAMPBELL replied:
I think that it's something the division can take on,
and it is not going to be easy. I think ... the
reason why it's been controversial is because the
insurance companies think they have everything they
need on there and the pharmacists are saying, "No, you
don't have everything we need on there." And I think
that the goal is really to sit down at the table with
both of them and figure out what it is that really
needs to be on the cards, and I guess that's what we
would do through the regulatory process.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked whether any other states or
jurisdictions have a standard.
MS. CAMPBELL replied:
As I understand it, there are a number of states that
have adopted uniform prescription drug card
legislation; I don't know how many, or what they ...
look like. From what I've heard, they vary from state
to state, and the goal of the pharmacy organizations
has been that it be a national standard so that it
doesn't vary across states. And that just simply
hasn't happened, as I understand it.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked Ms. Campbell whether she
envisions that the cards will have a magnetic strip or a bar
code on the back so that the information can be read in that
fashion as opposed to having everything printed on the card.
MS. CAMPBELL replied: "I don't think that was part of the plan;
it was more ... like the Aetna card that has the information
printed on it, [but] it wouldn't preclude the use of a bar
code."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG again asked Ms. Campbell whether she
needs any additional direction from the legislature.
MS. CAMPBELL replied:
I think one really critical piece that would be useful
would be to get your direction on the use of the
actual national standard that was referenced [in] the
prior versions of the bill, and how close we need to
be there.
TAPE 03-48, SIDE B
Number 2388
MS. CAMPBELL continued:
I think ... some of the issue has been that a lot of
the claim processing is done electronically. And so
even if you don't have it on the card, ... [when] you
go in and you get a prescription filled, ... you have
a social security number ... [to] put [on] the screen
and ... all the information comes up that you need to
process to a claim - ... you don't need to have all
kinds of information on the card. ... That's their one
side. And I think the pharmacists are saying, "No, we
really want to have a card that has more complete
information; that's consistent with this national
standard." That's my understanding of the issue. And
so, to the extent that you would want the division to
draft a regulation that references those national
standards, that would be useful.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO, noting that he already has two cards from
different insurance companies, asked whether it would be
possible to create one card that could replace those he now
carries in his wallet. Or would the uniform prescription drug
card they've been discussing be in addition to the cards he now
carries? Is there a standard that says it doesn't matter
because the information is the same? But then the companies
would be different, he remarked, and the pharmacist needs to
know the company.
MS. CAMPBELL replied, "I think if we move to a single-payor
system, that might work, but each insurance company is going to
have their own information."
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked what the process would be when
someone is traveling. He noted that it would be good if a
pharmacist could also use the card to see what other
prescriptions a person is using so as to be able to prevent
conflicts in medication usage.
Number 2289
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he is not sure whether this vehicle
can solve the problem of having numerous cards. He suggested,
though, that perhaps the cards could be made similar to each
other. He reiterated that the goal of HB 32 is to streamline
the prescription process, and that he is reluctant to list
specific things in statute. He again indicated that Version D
offers a good way to go about the process of creating a uniform
prescription drug card.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG posited that the division might welcome
more legislative direction.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he would not mind adding some intent
language to the bill or perhaps even attaching a letter of
intent.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Ms. Campbell whether there is a
"turf war" going on and, if so, wouldn't it be better to avoid
it by perhaps making a legislative decision with regard to
certain items.
MS. CAMPBELL replied:
I think there is somewhat of a turf war, but any
direction you that can give [regarding] how you would
[like] ... to handle that would be helpful when we sit
down ... [at] the table to talk about the card. I
think it's been a very controversial issue, no doubt
about it, between the pharmacists and the insurance
companies [regarding] what should be on that card and
how it should be structured. So I think some of the
insurance companies' concern has been with the
reference to those national standards, and so to the
extent that we can get some direction on where you
want to go, whether it's in statute or just intent
language, something so that we know where you want to
go with that would be helpful.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL surmised that he could probably get
something drafted to that effect for the next committee of
referral, adding that he favors the standard set forth by the
National Council for Prescription Drug Programs (NCPDP).
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM mentioned that it would probably also
be helpful to get input from the drug companies that provide
computerized information.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG relayed that having the legislature make
the decision regarding standards gives him greater comfort than
just leaving that burden with the department to decide via
regulation.
Number 2037
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved to report the proposed CS for HB
32, Version 23-LS0203\D, Ford, 3/5/03, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the forthcoming fiscal note.
There being no objection, CSHB 32(L&C) was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 2020
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
4:40 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|