Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/11/2001 03:01 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
April 11, 2001
3:01 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chair
Senator John Cowdery
Senator Gene Therriault
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Dave Donley, Vice Chair
Senator Johnny Ellis
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 145
"An Act relating to the expansion of the village public safety
officer program to include the provision of probation and parole
supervision services, and to retirement benefits for village public
safety officers."
MOVED CSSB 145(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 150
"An Act relating to insurance premiums for rental motor vehicles."
MOVED HB 150 OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 91(HES)
"An Act relating to information and services available to pregnant
women and other persons; and ensuring informed consent before an
abortion may be performed, except in cases of medical emergency."
MOVED CSSB 91(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 145 - See Judiciary minutes dated 3/26/01.
HB 150 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 3/27/01.
SB 91 - See HESS minutes dated 3/14/01, 3/16/01 and 4/2/01.
See Judiciary minutes dated 4/9/01.
WITNESS REGISTER
Senator Rick Halford
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 145
Mr. Ron Summerville, Consultant
House and Senate Majority
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 145
Mr. Guy Bell, Director
Division of Retirement & Benefits
Department of Administration
PO Box 110200
Juneau, AK 99811-0200
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 145
Mr. Del Smith, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Public Safety
PO Box 111200
Juneau, AK 99811-1200
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Mr. Robin Lown
VPSO Program Manager for Southeast Alaska
Tlingit Haida Central Council
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Mr. Richard Krause
VPSO Manager
Aleutian Pribilof Island Association
201 East 3rd
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Mr. Jim Knopke
Tanana Chiefs Conference
Fairbanks, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Ms. Candice Brower, Program Coordinator
Department of Corrections
431 N. Franklin, Suite 203
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Ms. Theresa Kobuk
PO Box 18
St. Michael, Alaska 99659
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Ms. Josie Stiles
Kawerak, Inc.
PO Box 948
Nome, Alaska 99762
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Mr. Tom Okleasik
Kawerak, Inc.
PO Box 948
Nome, Alaska 99762
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Mr. Brad Angasan
Bristol Bay Native Association
PO Box 310
Dillingham, Alaska 99576
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Major Doug Norris, Administrative Commander
Division of Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety
PO Box 111200
Juneau, AK 99811-1200
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 145
Mr. Charlie Miller
ANC Rental Corporation & Hertz Rental Corporation
No address furnished
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 150
Ms. Any Erickson
Staff to Representative Lisa Murkowski
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 150
Ms. Karen Vosburgh
PO Box 1847
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 91
Ms. Karen Pearson, Director
Division of Public Health
Department of Health &
Social Services
PO Box 110601
Juneau, AK 99801-0601
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 91
Ms. Jennifer Rudinger
PO Box 201844
Anchorage, Alaska 99520
POSITION STATEMENT: Read a statement by Dr. Whitefield in
opposition to SB 91.
Ms. Robin Smith
14100 Jarvi
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 91
Ms. Deatrich Sitchler
520 Glacier Bay Cr., #B
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 91
Mr. Bob Johnson
No address furnished
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 91
Ms. Sandra Altland
Staff to Senator Jerry Ward
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 91
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-17, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting
to order at 3:01 p.m. Chairman Taylor announced the first order of
business would be SB 145.
SB 145-VILLAGE PUB.SAFETY OFFICER PROGRAM
SENATOR RICK HALFORD, sponsor of SB 145, said that many Alaskan
Natives who are in correctional institutions for probation
violations are not able to go back to their villages because of the
lack of probation supervision in their community so they are stuck
in regional centers or large communities. Several years ago a pilot
program was created through the village public safety officer
(VPSO) program to put probation and parole supervisors in small
communities. That program has been a success. SB 145 would expand
that program into a statewide program. The VPSO program has been
administered by the Department of Public Safety (DPS). SB 145 would
coordinate that program with the Department of Corrections (DOC)
with regard to probation and parole. SB 145 would do four things:
it allows people on probation to return to their villages; it
provides for a pay increase for VPSO officers; it creates a career
ladder for VPSOs; and it allows VPSO officers to participate in the
Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) if they chose to do so.
SENATOR COWDERY moved to adopt CSSB 145(JUD), version 22-LS0584\S,
as the working draft of the committee. There being no objection,
CSSB 145(JUD) was adopted for the purpose of discussion.
MR. RON SOMERVILLE, Resource Consultant to the House and Senate
Majority, explained the changes made to the committee substitute
(CS) and commented that an amendment had been proposed (amendment
1) to Section 3. The CS contains a new section that deals with
civil liability for acts or omissions of VPSOs. Section 2 provides
for probation and parole under the direction of DOC, similar to the
pilot project in the Bristol Bay region. The commissioner of DOC
is given the authority to adopt regulations related to the
functions of the VPSO program.
SENATOR COWDERY moved to adopt amendment 1, which deletes Section 3
and adds a new section and reads as follows.
AMENDMENT 1 to CS FOR SB 145(JUD)
Page 2, Line 23. Delete Section 3 and substitute the following:
Sec. 3. AS 18.65 is amended by adding a new section to article 9
to read:
Sec. 18.65.680. Regional public safely officers. The
commissioner of public safety may appoint regional
public safety officers to
(1) provide an expanded public safety and law
enforcement presence in rural areas of the state;
(2) provide oversight and training for the
village public safety officer program;
(3) administer functions relating to:
(A) protecting life and property in the rural
areas of the state;
(B) conducting investigations;
(C) conducting search and rescue missions;
(D) conducting local training programs in
drug and alcohol awareness and
prevention, water safety, and gun
safety;
(4) perform other duties relating to public
safety as directed by the commissioner.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked Mr. Somerville to explain amendment 1.
MR. SOMERVILLE said Section 3 creates a new position for a regional
public safety officer (RPSO). This position is intended for small
regional areas, with the RPSO overseeing four or five VPSO officers
and it would act as a link between DPS and the VPSO program. The
key component of SB 145 would be the career path opportunity. The
RPSO would be selected from the VPSO officers and would go through
a training process by which he or she could become a certified
police officer. That person would then be authorized to handle
firearms and conduct all the business of a trooper.
Number 722
SENATOR THERRIAULT clarified that the RPSO would be a state
employee. He asked what the pay range would be.
MR. SOMERVILLE responded that the pay range would be established
through DPS, but the intent is to make the pay range somewhere
between a trooper and VPSO officer.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked how the duties of a RPSO would differ from
that of a trooper.
MR. SOMERVILLE said the RPSO would go through the same training as
a police officer but the job description would not require them to
move around the state.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that if the RPSO performed the same duties
as a trooper, that position should receive the same pay. He
questioned whether not having to move around the state is enough
justification for lower pay.
MR. SOMERVILLE said the job description would require less and not
having to move around might justify a lower pay range.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked what changes would be made by the
amendment.
MR. SOMERVILLE said the wording of the amendment makes it clear
that the regional officers are state employees who assist and
represent DPS.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted that the language on page 2, lines 26 and 27,
was replaced with, "provide an expanded public safety and law
enforcement presence in rural areas of the state." The wording on
lines 28 and 29 on page 2 was replaced with, "provide oversight and
training for the village public safety officer program." Page 3,
subsection (b) was removed and replaced with, "(3) administer
functions relating to: (A) protecting life and property in the
rural areas of the state; (B) conducting investigations; (C)
conducting search and rescue missions; (D) conducting local
training programs in drug and alcohol awareness and prevention,
water safety, and gun safety." He said this last subsection had
originally provided for probation and parole supervision, and he
thought the intent was to keep that in the bill.
MR. SOMERVILLE said the change was requested by DPS because
probation and parole supervision would be provided by DOC so it
does not need to be written in the statute as it relates to a DPS
employee.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that probation powers are being extended to
the VPSO officers but the bill creates a new category of employees
- RPSOs without probationary supervision powers. He said there had
once been a problem with that type of thing and, unless it could be
solved, the state would end up with more troopers through court
decree, instead of regional officers.
SENATOR HALFORD said:
Because they [the RPSOs] don't need them. Because the
others need it specifically delegated and they need a
dual line of authority - one to Corrections and one to
Public Safety because they're actually employees of a
regional non-profit corporation. With regard to the
troopers, the troopers already have the ability, any
level of trooper, wherever you go in Public Safety, they
already have the ability to work with Corrections at
Corrections' direction on a parole probation question.
They can go check on somebody right now, a parole officer
could ask a trooper to make a check on somebody on
probation in a community they are going through very
easily, and they do it. So it's just not necessary. But
Senator Therriault, your concern is exactly right with
regard to how do you create something less than a trooper
that you want to keep in an area and not get sucked into
the same problem the original constables had.
Number 1122
SENATOR THERRIAULT said he believes there needs to be some type of
limitation on what the regional officer could do if the pay scale
were to be different.
SENATOR HALFORD said that concern is legitimate, but a job
requiring someone to move around the state at someone else's
discretion should have a higher pay scale. He said it might be
necessary to go through the original case to see where the holes
are and solve those problems in SB 145, but he thought there was a
legitimate difference in the pay scale.
SENATOR HALFORD said the goal was to start with four positions,
putting the officers in areas where they are needed most. A VPSO's
level of ability in a community depends on whether troopers would
be able to get there and support them. Where troopers support them
they have respect; where troopers do not support them they are
sometimes ignored and in some cases dangerously ignored.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said he understood how backup from a trooper
would give strength to how a community views a VPSO officer. He
had heard criticisms that contractual arrangements with non-profit
organizations can limit what a VPSO officer could do by virtue of
the contract provisions. In some communities the officers are not
held in high esteem because the contract does not give them much
power.
SENATOR HALFORD said everything flows downhill from the fact that
the officers are underpaid and under-supported.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if there was an objection to amendment 1.
There was no objection, so amendment 1 was adopted.
MR. SOMERVILLE said Sections 4, 5, and 6 deal with participation in
PERS. Regional public safety officers would participate in PERS
because they would be state employees and VPSO officers would also
have the opportunity to participate if they chose to do so.
However, some non-profit organizations have better retirement
programs than the state, so an officer could choose to stay within
the non-profit retirement system.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked where that language was in CSSB 145(JUD).
MR. SOMERVILLE suggested that language was on page 4, line 9. He
said some non-profit organizations pay the total contribution of
their own system. If an employee chose to be in PERS, he or she
would be responsible for their portion and the non-profit would be
responsible for the employer portion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR then took public testimony.
Number 1589
MR. GUY BELL, Director, Division of Retirement & Benefits,
Department of Administration, said the department had submitted a
zero fiscal note that still applies to the CS but that he might
have some suggestions after looking at CSSB 145(JUD) in more
detail.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR cautioned him because the legislature had moved
into the 24-hour notice period and CSSB 145(JUD) would be leaving
the Senate Judiciary Committee and moving to Senate Finance in the
next few days, and the questions that Senator Therriault asked are
very important. He thought those questions will be very important
to the Finance Committee.
MR. BELL said the department would be looking at sections 4, 5, and
6 relating to Title 39.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said the language he had been looking for was on
page 4, lines 17 through 23, which says, "credited service under
this subsection is indebted to the system." He asked how to
calculate what the market would have earned on that money had it
been accruing for five years.
MR. BELL said the interest accrues at seven percent under
regulation, so a seven percent rate of return is assumed. A net
present value of expected future benefits of the years of service
the person is claiming is the cost, assuming a seven percent
interest rate.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if the employer was liable for the
employer's contribution and if the employee was liable for their
contribution, picking up the seven percent interest.
MR. BELL replied no, as CSSB 145(JUD) is written, the full
obligation goes to the employee. If the employee wished to
purchase prior service, 100 percent of the liability would be the
employee's liability.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said the contributions and interest would have
accrued and, by regulation, the interest would be seven percent.
MR. BELL said that was correct.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if any of the cost was spread into the
retirement system.
MR. BELL said the responsibility was entirely on the employee.
Number 1748
MR. DEL SMITH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Safety,
said that DPS had been working with Senator Halford on the VPSO
program and would like to see more troopers, VPSO officers, and
more RPSOs.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH said the department shared the same
concerns as Senator Therriault with the "like work, like pay
issue." The arbitration that occurred with the original constables
occurred before his time with the department but the department
would try to craft the VPSO program, as it would have under the
constable program, with slightly lower levels of responsibility.
The job description would be crafted to ensure that the problem of
like work, like pay would not be revisited again.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said the committee would be relying on DPS and if
SB 145 passed it should be stated for the record:
On behalf of the committee, it is specifically not our
intent to create a new class of troopers and end up with
that class of troopers then going through that same
process of like pay, like work because, if that's the
case, we will have defeated the very purpose for which
the legislation was crafted to give us a person that
wouldn't be transferred, that would have a lower pay
range and we would be able to provide more of them. So
that's certainly the intent of this committee and
anything you can do to assist through the department in
drafting regulations would be very much appreciated.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH said that was consistent with the course
the governor wanted to take.
Number 1865
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if a directive in statute was needed to
say the job duty was to be less than a trooper's.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH replied that he did not think this was
needed. He felt it is possible to create this position without
legislation because the trooper, sergeant and corporal rank had not
been created in legislation.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR suggested that the department should have an
amendment ready to submit to the Finance committee if the
department's advisors feel that legislative authorization is needed
to justify the definitions within department regulations.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked whom the department would be dealing with
in drafting the regulations.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH said the department would write the job
description - regulation was not a term he would use. The job
description would detail what was to be accomplished by this
position, and eventually the department would have to negotiate
with the Public Safety Employees' Association (PSEA).
Number 1993
Mr. Robin Lown, VPSO Program Manager for Southeast Alaska, Tlingit
Haida Central Council, said he currently has nine VPSO officers
working for him and he is also the chairman of the VPSO Program
Managers Coordinating Committee, which consists of nine VPSO
managers around the state. He said the VPSO managers support SB
145 and support a statewide program. A pay increase to compensate
for the additional duties is also supported and would help keep
VPSO officers in the program. VPSO managers also support the
career path possibility and the inclusion of a better retirement
option for officers. He noted the PERS provision needs more work.
Overall, Mr. Lown said any incentives that will help to retain
VPSOs are appreciated and important.
MR. RICHARD KRAUSE, VPSO Manager, Aleutian Pribilof Island
Association, said he supports 145.
Number 2174
MR. JIM KNOPKE, Tanana Chiefs Conference, thanked Senator Halford
for bringing SB 145 forward. He said that having a good retirement
program would help increase the viability of the VPSO program and
it would also help with retention and in obtaining new resources
for the program. He said SB 145 may not solve all the problems but
it is a step in the right direction and he supports it completely.
TAPE 01-17, SIDE B
MS. CANDICE BROWER, Department of Corrections (DOC), thanked
Senator Halford for seeing the need for probationers and parolees
in the villages. The VPSO program enables people to go back home
where they tend to be more successful. As a former shelter
director in rural Alaska, she has seen first hand the problems that
VPSO officers face when domestic violence becomes dangerous. She
said DOC supports SB 145.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Brower what limits the VPSO officers'
effectiveness in villages.
MS. BROWER replied that domestic violence is the most dangerous
situation a person can come across and many times a VPSO officer is
related to the person perpetuating the violence. Intervening in
that type of situation could be problematic and it requires a lot
of diplomacy and skill. VPSO officers have not been well paid and
they need to be compensated for that type of job duty.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked how parole and probation supervision would
be limited so the state would not fall into the trap of equal work,
equal pay.
MS. BROWER said RPSOs would not have the same powers a parole and
probation officer would have. The program that is in place now
relies on VPSOs to do things at the direction of the probation
officer, such as request breathalyzer tests and a urine analysis.
RPSOs also check on probationers and parolees but they do not have
the authority to arrest or detain people. They also notify the
probation officer of violations.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that unlike the new position that is being
created, VPSO officers clearly do not have the statutory powers
that a correction officer has.
MS. BROWER said that is correct.
MS. THERESA KOBUK, St. Michael VPSO, said she is in full support of
SB 145. She said as a VPSO officer she was barely making it
financially and would appreciate the pay raise that SB 145
afforded.
MS. JOSIE STILES, Program Manager, Kawerak, Inc., said she was
elated that Senator Halford had introduced SB 145. Ms. Stiles said
she had been in the VPSO program for 17 years and the starting
salary was $13.99 an hour. Because of the low pay, some officers
qualify for food stamps and others have a second job. A pay
increase would help officers focus on public safety and the
community. She said the VPSO program and Kawerak support the
addition of regional managers. Those positions would give officers
who have been in the program many years an opportunity for a career
step without having to become a trooper and leave their community.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Stiles to list a few of the
restrictions that DPS has placed on VPSO officers.
MS. STILES replied that in serious felony cases or major
misdemeanor cases, officers are told not to respond. She said
officers face many hardships and high levels of job stress. Often
the back-up coming from the troopers is slow and depends on the
geophysical location and the severity and priority of the case.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said he heard that VPSO officers could not issue
traffic situations.
MS. STILES said that is correct.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if VPSO officers could enforce Alaska fish
and game statutes.
MS. STILES said officers do not enforce Alaska fish and game
statutes because they already have too many duties, such as search
and rescue, fires, law enforcement, and emergency trauma.
MR. TOM OKLEASKI, Vice President of Community Service, Kawerak,
Inc., Nome, said the board supports SB 145 and it passed a
resolution of support. He said the wage increase in SB 145 was an
effective way to increase the pay scale for officers, which would
help with retention and recruitment.
Number 1787
MR. BRAD ANGASAN, VPSO Program Manager, Bristol Bay Native
Association (BBNA), said BBNA supports SB 145, particularly the pay
increase and the opportunity for officers to participate in PERS.
BBNA is funded to provide 12 VPSO officers and it administers the
parole supervision pilot project. [Mr. Angasan's transmission was
cut off at that point and he was not able to complete his
testimony.]
MAJOR BRUCE DOUG NORRIS, Alaska State Troopers, said at one time a
VPSO officer in Southeast Alaska had actively stopped people for
traffic violations, and the VPSO program was never intended for
that. Where villages are connected to road systems, there are
state troopers for serious traffic incidents, and when there are
minor infractions the VPSO officer can notify a trooper for later
action. It is policy to discourage VPSO officers from doing active
traffic enforcement, they are trained for traffic stops but they
are not armed. In villages where there is no connection to a road
system, VPSO officers can stop people and cite them.
MAJOR NORRIS said VPSO officers help with fish and game matters by
gathering evidence and reporting matters to the fish and game
officer, but they do not take an active role.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if VPSO officers could issue traffic
citations in McGrath.
MAJOR NORRIS said absolutely. VPSO officers are told they cannot
actively work traffic but they are not told they cannot write
citations.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said the level of respect in the McGrath area
has been impacted by the fact that people think VPSO officers do
not even have the authority to issue traffic citations.
MAJOR NORRIS said there was possibly a communication problem in
that area.
Number 1470
SENATOR HALFORD asked if McGrath has a trooper or a VPSO officer.
MAJOR NORRIS said McGrath had a Fish and Wildlife officer.
SENATOR COWDERY moved CSSB 145(JUD) from committee with individual
recommendations. There being no objection, CSSB 145(JUD) moved
from committee.
Number 1180
HB 150-INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR RENTAL VEHICLES
MR. CHARLIE MILLER, representing the ANC Rental Corporation and
Hertz Rental Corporation, said HB 150 takes care of an unintended
omission from a piece of legislation that went through the
Legislature a few years earlier, which made the public policy
decision on how to regulate insurance products that are sold
incidental to the rental contract. That bill required an insurance
agent to hold a premium in a separate fiduciary account. This was
necessary for an agent's business but insurance products were a
small portion of the business and are separate from the contract.
HB 150 allows that requirement to be waived.
MS. AMY ERICKSON, staff to Representative Murkowski, noted that HB
150 is a cleanup measure that corrects a requirement that motor
vehicle rental companies hold rental car insurance in separate
trust accounts. This requirement was unintended and HB 150
eliminates it.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked for the identification of the original
legislation.
MS. ERICKSON replied it was SB 87 from 1999, which required
licensing for rental car insurance.
SENATOR THERRIAULT read the last sentence from a letter of support
from the Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED),
which said:
Overall, I believe that this bill properly balances the
public's right to be protected from loss of coverage
after premium is paid while keeping the costs of
regulatory compliance reasonable.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if DCED supported HB 150 and someone from the
audience responded yes.
SENATOR COWDERY moved HB 150 from committee with individual
recommendations. There being no objection, HB 150 moved from
committee.
Number 910
SB 91-ABORTION: INFORMED CONSENT;INFORMATION
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted that at the last committee hearing on SB 91,
time was short and not everyone was able to testify. Because of
that, Ms. Carmen Nantez, Ms. Pat Salzbo, Ms. Marlee Starnez, Ms.
Neva Starnes, Ms. Jennifer Rudinger, Ms. Jana Franks, and Dr. Bob
Johnson submitted their written testimony to the committee.
Senator Ward's office had also submitted a memorandum giving a
further breakdown on SB 91. He then took testimony.
MS. KAREN VOSBURGH, Executive Director, Alaska Right to Life,
testifying via teleconference, said she had gathered statistical
information about the psychological and physical damage that can be
incurred from an abortion. She said women need to know what can
happen to them because of an abortion and they also need
information about the developing child within them. She said the
abortionist decides what information, if any, to give, and that it
was not in the best interest of the abortionist to dissuade a
client, as they would lose money. She said the abortion industry
generates about $500,000,000 a year and most of that money goes
into the pockets of the abortionists.
MS. VOSBURGH said that SB 91 was not as much an abortion issue as
it was a health issue because there are over 100 complications
associated with abortions. Ms. Vosburgh said she supports SB 91.
MS. KAREN PEARSON, Division of Public Health, Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS), spoke to Section 1(a)(1) - (9) saying
many of the requirements in those sections would make the required
pamphlet a very large document. She suggested that the information
should be put in several different pamphlets, each with different
information. She was not comfortable with asking women to review
all the information if it was not relevant to their situation. She
noted that this is where different pamphlets with different
information would be useful. She gave an example of a woman who
had chosen to go ahead with her pregnancy and then placed the child
with an adoption agency. She said that giving that woman a
pamphlet, showing all the complications of an abortion, would not
be fair.
Number 421
SENATOR COWDERY said insurance companies have policies that include
a lot of information and he felt a pamphlet could be designed to
cover all the information required in SB 91.
MS. PEARSON said that would be difficult because Section 1(B)(7)
says:
describes the fetal development of a typical unborn child
at two-week gestational increments from fertilization to
full-term, including photographs depicting the anatomical
characteristics of a typical unborn child at two-week
gestational increments."
MS. PEARSON said this information and the photographs would have to
be very small to be included in one pamphlet.
Number 331
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked about the example Ms. Pearson gave and if
DHSS had a pamphlet concerning adoption.
MS. PEARSON said DHSS has different types of information but she
said there needs to be clarification on who the pamphlet's audience
is to be. SB 91 says the department shall prepare a pamphlet for,
"Information relating to pregnancy and pregnancy alternatives," but
it is not clear if the pamphlet is to lay out different
alternatives or whether it is to say these are the alternatives to
an abortion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked how DHSS came up with the materials it
distributes for planned parenthood.
MS. PEARSON said the department does not put all the information in
one document; several documents are used for different situations.
MS. JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director, Alaska Civil Liberties
Union, read a statement from Dr. Jan Whitefield.
Honorable Senators, I recently read SB 91 proposed by
Senator Ward. I must object to this bill on multiple
grounds. This bill is a thinly veiled attempt squarely
aimed at making it more difficult for women of Alaska to
receive abortions. It contains biased language
throughout, and indirectly suggests placing new
limitations on the availability of the abortion
procedure. The bill claims to be about informed consent.
As physicians we are quite familiar with informed
consent. If there is a complication of a procedure and
informed consent was not obtained, we are painfully aware
of the consequences. Getting proper informed consent
before an abortion is very high on my list of priorities.
Contrary to what some people may think, there is no
[indisc. - end of tape[.
TAPE 01-18, Side A
... If a patient carries a pregnancy to term, our
practice will have a much larger revenue stream than if
the patient has an abortion. There is no incentive on
our part to encourage abortion over an ongoing pregnancy.
The bill starts in a biased manner by saying that it is
meant to 'ensure informed consent before an abortion may
be performed except in cases of medical emergency.' A
pregnancy has several possible outcomes including
carrying and delivery, abortion, adoption, miscarriage,
and ectopic miscarriage, and others. There is no mention
of getting informed consent from women regarding carrying
a pregnancy to term or giving the pregnancy up for
adoption. In my practice as a physician, I perform
abortions as well as multiple other procedures including
both office and hospital procedures. The legislature has
not chosen to pass a bill on how I obtain consent from a
person for a C-section or a hysterectomy, both of which
carry far more risk to the patient than an abortion.
Clearly the abortion is being singled out, but not for
medical reasons. This bill relates to politics and
belief, not medicine or the safety of Alaska women.
Throughout the bill the term unborn child is used. A
review of the 23rd edition of Stedman's Medical
Dictionary reveals that the term unborn or the phrase
unborn child are simply not recognized. There are
medical terms such as blastocyst (ph), morulla (ph)
embryo, fetus, and several other terms referring to the
conceptive. The term unborn child is included to incite
only emotion. On page 2, line 25 the term non-judgmental
is used when the decidedly judgmental phrase - unborn
child - is used in the very same sentence, a
contradiction of terms.
In page 1, line 1 through 3, line 23 a standard pamphlet
of information is described again using biased terms
defined by the legislators not terms recognized in
medical science. Page 2, paragraph 7, lines 19 to 27
describe in detail the pictures that need to be included
in this pamphlet. Why are these to be included, are
these meant to 'educate the patient regarding the fetal
development when she is deciding whether to carry a
pregnancy or whether to have an abortion. If so, where
are the parallel photographs describing the complications
of abortion as well as the complications of carrying the
pregnancy to term. Of what value are these pictures
specified in the bill. When I council patients regarding
an ongoing pregnancy or an abortion, if a patient asks me
for drawings or photographs of a fetus at various stages
of development, I have an encyclopedia containing the
information and I go over it with the patient. But I
tailor the information to the needs of the patient. Each
person is an individual and a standard information packet
alluded to by this bill leaves very little room for
patient individuality.
C. Everett Koop former surgeon general who is no friend
to choice and the American College of Obstetrics and
Gynecology after extensively reviewing the literature
concluded that there is not solid scientific data
suggesting that there are long-term negative
psychological effects from an abortion. Yet paragraph 8,
page 2, line 31 refers to "possible psychological
effects' that have been associated with having an
abortion. Why should a patient be subjected to this
concept when there is no proof that it exists and will
only serve to frighten the patient with false
information. Informed consent should only involve actual
scientific information, not speculation or conjecture.
Actual scientific information is referred to line 26 page
2, if this reference remains in the bill where is the
comparable line referring to the possible psychological
risks of adopting the baby out. Finally, Dr. Whitefield
concludes this bill is not about science, it's not about
medicine, and this bill is not about information or
informed consent.
This bill is simple bias, placing more obstruction in the
paths of women seeking an abortion. The suggested body
of information already available and gathering it as
suggested is duplication of effort. The requirements of
SB 91 serve only as an obstacle intended to discourage
patients from choosing a procedure that is recognized as
one of the safest performed in medicine. The persons
served are not the patients but those who wish to further
obstruct abortion in Alaska.
MS. RUDINGER said she also had statements from Dr. Kathleen Todd
and Dr. Sharon Smith whose comments were basically the same as Dr.
Whitefield's and she would fax them to the committee.
Number 444
MS. ROBIN SMITH, testifying via teleconference, said she is deeply
opposed to Senator Ward's bill. She said that if abortions are to
be prevented, unintended pregnancies that lead to abortions need to
be addressed. SB 91 is an attempt to intimidate women from making
the choice to having an abortion. Ms. Smith said the required
pamphlet was redundant. The decision to have an abortion was a
difficult one and the government should not make women feel guilty
or bad by imposing more barriers. Women are capable of making
moral decisions without government interference. She said that if
the legislature goes forward with SB 91, women also need to be
informed about unintended pregnancies. She said another concern
with SB 91 was the likelihood of receiving child support from an
absent father and how much support the state would provide
throughout a child's life. Ms. Smith said that if SB 91 passed she
would lobby to have this other information included in the
pamphlet.
MS. SMITH said she would support legislation to prevent unintended
pregnancies and she urged the committee to pass the prescription
equity bill, which would make insurance companies cover birth
control. She also urged the passage of the safe surrender bill
that would allow women an anonymous and safe way to relinquish a
newborn child.
MS. DEATRICH SITCHLER, testifying via teleconference from
Anchorage, said she is opposed to SB 91. She said at the age of 14
she was diagnosed with hemophilia, a disease affecting the blood,
and as a result of this condition it is medically dangerous for her
to carry a pregnancy to term. If she were to become pregnant it
would be in her best medical interest to terminate the pregnancy
rather than carry the pregnancy to term. She felt this decision
should only be between her partner, her doctor, and herself - the
government should have no place in this personal painful choice.
She and her partner would find it very painful to listen to a
litany of alternatives to abortion, alternatives that would not be
in her best interest and that could actually threaten her life.
Her greatest objection to SB 91 was in the definition of medical
emergency. Ms. Sitchler would not fall under the medical necessity
exception because having an abortion at that very moment would
probably not be a lifesaving measure or an emergency situation.
Therefore, she would be subject to the extra counseling, which
would be irrelevant to her situation. She said this decision would
be very painful for her and she would only be terminating her
pregnancy to save her own life. She urged the committee to oppose
SB 91.
MS. KAREN VOSBURGH said psychological damages are very real. There
is a sense of depression and a sense of loss that are very common
after an abortion. An abortion also creates the feeling of low
self-esteem and feelings of having compromised values. Feelings of
guilt are the most common reaction to abortion. She said the
suicide rate is phenomenally high among women who have had
abortions. She said that abortion was suppose to reduce teen
pregnancy but the unmarried teen pregnancy rate has risen, and
child abuse was to be eliminated due to abortion but studies show
that there had been an increase in child abuse in the last two
decades. She said abortion had devalued children, born and unborn,
and women were told that abortion would empower them but they were
not told how guilty and angry they would feel. She urged the
committee to pass SB 91.
Number 1003
MR. BOB JOHNSON said that he had been listening to some horrendous
complications from an abortion during the meeting but, in fact,
there were very few complications, and his experience with 700
abortions shows very few incidents with complications or
depression. He said complications from a normal pregnancy far
exceed complications from abortions. He echoed Dr. Whitefield on
Dr. Koop's study that said there were very few complications from
an abortion. He said this type of legislation insults a woman's
intelligence.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if Senator Ward had considered whether he
wanted one piece of information or a series of pamphlets.
MS. SANDRA ALTLAND, staff to Senator Ward, said the pamphlet was
not to replace other pamphlets. The intent of SB 91 was to give
more information than what was available now. She said there was
no hidden agenda to SB 91, Senator Ward was trying to lay out ideas
he would like to see submitted so that when a woman was trying to
make a decision she would have the information she need. She said
Senator Ward would be happy to work with DHSS to develop a pamphlet
that would work.
SENATOR THERRIAULT suggested that the pamphlet could have a
geographically indexed supplement included.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said he was incredulous at the comments that had
been received on Senator Ward's attempt to merely distribute some
information. He said:
The same types of comments are made in every totalitarian
society when somebody wants to 'burn up books' - we don't
want that information going out, that information isn't
correct, that information isn't politically correct or
what we want to have out there. So if you're going to
put any information out there that we, the dominant
liberal cause don't want to have out there, why we'll do
everything we can to ban you book. That to me is just
incredible testimony. You would think that people would
want to have the greatest level of information available
to be made readily available. This state has already put
it into law that all of Planned Parenthood's materials
are going to be distributed for them. The very same
people that happily go out and fill up the little
brochure boxes at every place to make certain that
Planned Parenthood's documents get disbursed are some of
the same people we're listening who say you can't
possibly give that information to anybody else or require
that they should have an opportunity to see that
information before going through a procedure. I consider
that somewhat amazing in the 20th Century.
MS. ALTLAND said there are doctors who take the time and give good
information, but if they are not recognizing any psychological
harm, how can they be fully informing the woman they are working
with.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said there seemed to be quite a medical dispute
about that. He said the items included in the pamphlet should be
as accurate as possible so they cannot be disputed.
MS. KAREN PEARSON clarified that the department's interpretation of
planned parenthood in the statute was not Planned Parenthood the
organization. DHSS does not distribute Planned Parenthood
materials. The information DHSS distributes to the public is about
planning to be a parent.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said he understood that but if he were to put the
department's documents next to Planned Parenthood's documents he
would have a hard time seeing much difference.
MS. PEARSON said that the department does its best to get the
information out that it believes is appropriate and to inform the
public on all perspectives.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the department was pushing abstention or
was it handing out condoms.
MS. PEARSON said DHSS has a very active program for teenagers in
relation to abstinence and there are no abstinence programs for
adults.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if DHSS kept any statistical information on
the age of people receiving abortions, especially those receiving
state financing.
MS. PEARSON said the department does not have abortion reporting.
She said there was a piece of legislation going through this year
that mandated the reporting of terminated pregnancies. The
department does have information on terminated pregnancies paid for
with public dollars though.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if DHSS had information on how many times a
woman has had a state paid abortion.
MS. PEARSON said she did not have the answer to that question. She
would have to check with the division dealing with Medicaid.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said that in his district there were five girls,
still in high school, each of which had already had three abortions
all paid for by the state. He said that whatever is being done to
convince people about abstinence or use of birth control devices
was not working very well and the ultimate solution is, "you don't
have to take a pill and you don't have to worry about using a
condom, if in fact you get pregnant, just go get the state to give
you an abortion."
SENATOR COWDERY moved SB 91 from committee with individual
recommendations. There being no objection, SB 91 moved from
committee.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chairman Taylor adjourned the meeting at 5:09 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|