Legislature(1997 - 1998)

04/07/1998 03:40 PM Senate STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
            SENATE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE                                     
                    April 7, 1998                                              
                      3:40 p.m.                                                
                                                                               
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                
                                                                               
Senator Lyda Green, Chairman                                                   
Senator Jerry Ward, Vice-Chairman                                              
Senator Jerry Mackie                                                           
Senator Mike Miller                                                            
Senator Jim Duncan                                                             
                                                                               
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                 
                                                                               
All members present                                                            
                                                                               
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                             
                                                                               
SENATE BILL NO. 348                                                            
"An Act relating to rights of conscience protection for persons who            
directly or indirectly provide or perform health care services."               
                                                                               
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                          
                                                                               
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 449(STA)                                                 
"An Act relating to certain individual retirement accounts; and                
providing for an effective date."                                              
                                                                               
     - MOVED CSHB 449(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                    
                                                                               
SENATE BILL NO. 287                                                            
"An Act relating to parole consideration."                                     
                                                                               
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                          
                                                                               
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION                                               
                                                                               
SB 348 - No previous action to record.                                         
                                                                               
HB 449 - No previous action to record.                                         
                                                                               
SB 287 - No previous action to record.                                         
                                                                               
WITNESS REGISTER                                                               
                                                                               
Dr. Peter Nakamura, Director                                                   
Division of Public Health                                                      
Department of Health & Social Services                                         
P.O. Box 110610                                                                
Juneau, AK 99811-0610                                                          
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Has concerns with CSSB 348(STA)                         
                                                                               
Ms. Kristen Bomengen, Assistant Attorney General                               
Human Services Section                                                         
Department of Law                                                              
P.O. Box 110300                                                                
Juneau, AK 99811-0300                                                          
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Outlined problems with CSSB 348(STA)                    
                                                                               
Ms. Janet Oats, Director of Marketing & Government Relations                   
Providence Health System                                                       
P.O. Box 196604                                                                
Anchorage, AK 99519                                                            
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of CSSB 348(STA)                   
                                                                               
Dr. Gerald Phillips                                                            
P.O. Box 839                                                                   
Palmer, AK 99645                                                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports CSSB 348(STA)                                  
                                                                               
Dr. William Resinger                                                           
P.O. Box 3350                                                                  
Palmer, AK 99645                                                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of CSSB 348(STA)                   
                                                                               
Cliff Orme                                                                     
P.O. Box 3588                                                                  
Palmer, AK 99645                                                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of CSSB 348(STA)                   
                                                                               
Ms. Diana Buffington                                                           
317 Maple St.                                                                  
Kodiak, AK 99615                                                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports CSSB 348(STA)                                  
                                                                               
Joseph Balash, Staff to Representative Gene Therriault                         
State Capitol                                                                  
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                          
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Offered information on CSHB 449(STA)                    
                                                                               
Ms. Annette Kreitzer, Staff to Senator Loren Leman                             
State Capitol                                                                  
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                          
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented overview on SB 287                            
                                                                               
Michael Stark, Assistant Attorney General                                      
Legal Services Section, Criminal Division                                      
Department of Law                                                              
P.O.,. Box 110300                                                              
Juneau, AK 99811-0300                                                          
  POSITION STATEMENT:  SB 287 not needed                                       
                                                                               
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                               
                                                                               
TAPE 98-16, SIDE A                                                             
Number 001                                                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN called the Senate State Affairs Committee to order              
at 3:40 p.m. and noted all members were in attendance.                         
                                                                               
             SB 348 - RIGHTS OF CONSCIENCE PROTECTION                          
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN introduced SB 348, sponsored by the State Affairs               
Committee, as the first order of business.  She requested that                 
Senator Ward make a brief presentation on the legislation.                     
                                                                               
SENATOR WARD explained SB 348 will put into written form exactly               
what most people think is already their right under the                        
Constitution.  There are certain procedures throughout time that               
people of authority have pressured health care providers to                    
participate in regardless of what their conscience may say.  He                
said society should not be imposing rules and laws on people                   
against what their true beliefs are, and SB 348 will put into                  
effect the rights of conscience protection that these people                   
thought they had all along.                                                    
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER directed attention to a proposed committee                      
substitute.                                                                    
                                                                               
SENATOR WARD moved the adoption of CSSB 348(STA), version "B," and             
hearing no objection, CHAIRMAN GREEN stated it was adopted as a                
working document.                                                              
                                                                               
Number 070                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR DUNCAN asked if there is a constitutional amendment that               
goes along with the legislation.  SENATOR MILLER responded that he             
introduced SJR 35, which is in Senate Finance, and it would                    
essentially overturn the Valley Hospital decision, however, he                 
wasn't sure if the two pieces of legislation would move through the            
process together.  He also pointed out that there is a difference              
in the bill and the resolution.  The bill deals more with the                  
individual and the constitutional amendment deals more with the                
institutions.                                                                  
                                                                               
Number 106                                                                     
                                                                               
DR. PETER NAKAMURA, Director, Division of Public Health, Department            
of Health and Social Services, stated that he had not yet seen the             
committee substitute.  He spoke to the benefits of a program that              
mandates immunizations for entry into school.  However, he said                
there are physicians who don't believe in immunizations, and the               
fact that the people who don't have the resources to gain these                
services are the ones who are hurt.  Every time another barrier to             
access to a positive health service is put in place, it is the poor            
who suffer the consequences.  Dr. Nakamura said in terms of the                
bill, as he reads it, as a public health professional and as a                 
physician, he would strongly object to another barrier to access to            
any service that is critical to the poor who would have no other               
alternatives.                                                                  
                                                                               
Number 180                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER reminded Dr. Nakamura that the bill addresses                   
abortions, not other public health services.                                   
                                                                               
DR. NAKAMURA said if the bill specifically refers to abortions, and            
if the facility is built with federal dollars or if federal dollars            
are paying for the maintenance of that facility, it seems that the             
broad range of services should be available.  If an individual, by             
conscience, feels they don't want to participate, then the facility            
should provide some options to make sure that those services would             
still be available.  He added that if the facility were built with             
private funds, then he could see where they would have that right.             
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER asked Dr. Nakamura, as a hypothetical case, what                
happens if  a young lady in a remote village wants an abortion, but            
there is only one doctor in town and he does not believe in                    
performing abortions and she cannot afford access to another                   
doctor.  DR. NAKAMURA responded that if state or federal funds are             
supporting that individual's practice, he would have strong                    
objection to that.  He also clarified that he would not expect an              
individual if he felt strongly against an abortion to perform it,              
but he would expect that individual to make the information                    
available to assist the person seeking the abortion.                           
                                                                               
DR. NAKAMURA said SB 348 eliminates access to abortions in the                 
state of Alaska which then goes back to those of us who can afford             
to go out and access these services elsewhere, but there are those             
poor who might have an equally valid reason for wanting that                   
service but will not have access to it any more.                               
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER commented that he thinks the testimony shows reason             
why this bill is needed if the state is willing to enforce their               
moral convictions upon an individual who may have a different moral            
conviction.                                                                    
                                                                               
Number 250                                                                     
                                                                               
KRISTEN BOMENGEN, Assistant Attorney General, Human Services                   
Section, Department of Law, said that although she was not able to             
do an in-depth analysis of the committee substitute, she thinks it             
is an excellent substitute for the original bill, which has a great            
many references to broad moral convictions that would have caused              
no end of problems to health facilities in their hiring practices              
and in the delivery of services.  However, there still are some                
legal problems that remain with the committee substitute.                      
                                                                               
Ms. Bomengen referenced AS 14.17.040 which addresses the conscience            
of an institution.  She said because the health care institution               
definition includes public institutions, this statute would pretend            
to grant a public facility a right that actually violates the                  
constitutional protections that are articulated in the Valley                  
Hospital case.  That case very specifically said that a statute is             
not adequate to overrule a constitutionally protected right.                   
                                                                               
Number 280                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE asked if the constitutional amendment is needed.                
SENATOR MILLER clarified that the constitutional amendment relates             
to the institutions whereas SB 348 relates to institutional rights,            
and it is his opinion that the constitutional amendment would need             
to pass in order for this legislation to be valid.                             
                                                                               
Number 295                                                                     
                                                                               
MS. BOMENGEN related that there is a federal requirement that all              
institutions that receive Medicaid or Medicare funds have to have              
a policy that informs admitted patients of their right to advance              
directives and that particular institution's policy regarding                  
advance directives.  Consequently, an institution may not wish to              
adopt a policy that will allow them to carry out an advance                    
directive, but nonetheless, they are required by federal law to                
inform the person of their rights and not portray a partial picture            
to any patient that is being admitted.  If there were some                     
objection lodged by a board to even discussing this matter, which              
might be construed to be intended to end the life of a patient and             
that board were to assert that as their policy, then the state                 
certification board would have to decertify the institution for                
Medicaid or Medicare payments.  She said this statute still                    
provides a protection that says that a state agency cannot                     
discriminate against an institution that would choose to do so, so             
it presents a real conflict for the agency that she believes could             
actually endanger the entire Medicaid funding for the state.  The              
state is required to be able to assure in the state Medicaid plan              
that this advance directive information is provided to all patients            
when they are admitted.                                                        
                                                                               
Number 321                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE asked Ms. Bomengen if she could explain what the                
advance directive information means and whether or not that                    
actually applies to an abortion or the ending of a life.  MS.                  
BOMENGEN responded that she was speaking to living wills, do not               
resuscitate orders, organ donations, etc., that go to the kind of              
advance directives that an individual can choose to make.  She also            
clarified that Medicaid does not require that institutions perform             
a service, but it requires that they provide greatly detailed                  
information to individuals who are admitted to their facilities.               
She suggested that, at the minimum, some sort of definition of the             
terminology in the bill would be necessary to administer this.                 
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN directed attention to the "posted notice" language              
on page 3, line 24, but MS. BOMENGEN advised that the language is              
not adequate to meet the terms of the Medicaid and Medicare federal            
guidelines.                                                                    
                                                                               
Number 365                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE asked Ms. Bomengen if it was her opinion that this              
legislation does allow institutions to not provide the information.            
MS. BOMENGEN answered that she believes it could be interpreted to             
be applied that way.  SENATOR MACKIE said he thinks that is an                 
important point that needs to be clarified so as not to jeopardize             
Medicaid funding.                                                              
                                                                               
SENATOR WARD asked if Ms. Bomengen was saying that the posted                  
notice with all of the facts on it is not giving them notice.  MS.             
BOMENGEN reiterated that it does not meet the terms of the Medicaid            
requirements to provide written information to each individual                 
concerning their rights, and she would stand on her interpretation             
that this really requires more than posting a sign in a corner  or             
even in front of the admission desk that someone may or may not see            
regarding the hospital's policy on advance directives.                         
                                                                               
Number 410                                                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if the point was that the person must be told             
that they can have a living will and that there are advance                    
directive possibilities out there, and is that also followed by the            
fact that the institution has to provide that service.  MS.                    
BOMENGEN replied that the institution would not have to implement              
a living will, however, one cannot discriminate against an                     
individual in the provision of other care based on their election              
to have a living will.                                                         
                                                                               
Number 428                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER questioned if two facilities are providing the                  
necessary information, but a third facility elects not to for                  
whatever reason, would that mean that all three facilities would               
lose the federal funding.  MS. BOMENGEN responded that on its face             
it would not necessarily mean that all the hospitals would lose                
funding; however, there is provision in this law that poses a                  
problem for the state agency in its representations in the Medicaid            
state plan to the Federal Health Care Financing Agency.  The state             
has to assure the federal agency that it is complying with each of             
its requirements, and if one hospital was not meeting these terms,             
the state would be deemed to be out of compliance with the state's             
Medicaid plan.                                                                 
                                                                               
Number 452                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER asked Ms. Bomengen if it would help to delete the               
words "counsel and advise" wherever they appear in the bill.  MS.              
BOMENGEN answered that it may be one of the ways, or a definition              
may be one of the ways, some specific items in the exceptions list             
may be one of the ways, but she hasn't looked to see whether this              
would adequately do it.                                                        
                                                                               
Number 465                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE asked Ms. Bomengen if she is willing to provide the             
committee with an opinion or a recommendation as to what it would              
take to assure that Medicaid funding would not be lost.  MS.                   
BOMENGEN replied that the three options she outlined are there to              
be done, but she doesn't know which one may be the best.                       
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE asked how it works if a hospital like Providence                
Hospital does not wish to perform abortions, for obvious reasons,              
but a doctor determines in the course of treatment to a woman that             
an abortion may be one option that may be necessary to protect the             
life of that woman.  He questioned if this legislation gives them              
an avenue to not suggest that is one of the options that they would            
need to pursue.  He thinks those kinds of issues need to be really             
well thought out, not just whether or not some Medicaid funding is             
going to be lost.                                                              
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER said the first part of the bill addresses the                   
individual doctor that does not want to perform the service, but in            
Senator Mackie's hypothetical case, it sounds like a doctor that is            
willing to provide that information.  He said his concern is                   
mandating that an institution or an individual provide a service               
that violates religious or moral convictions.  He added that, in               
his opinion, as a result of the Valley Hospital case, there are                
going to be a number of cases filed, and the next one that is going            
to be filed is against Providence Hospital.                                    
                                                                               
                                                                               
Number 515                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE commented he has a certain appreciation for what he             
thinks  is the intent of the legislation, but he would have a                  
problem with not providing pertinent medical information to a                  
patient or pertinent information whether it is the living will                 
aspect or abortion services.                                                   
                                                                               
SENATOR MILLER agreed that as long as it is well balanced on both              
sides of the issue, letting the person make the choice.                        
                                                                               
Number 522                                                                     
                                                                               
MS. BOMENGEN said she wasn't certain that it is appropriate to                 
interpret current law to say that individuals are forced into                  
performing abortions under AS 18.16.010, because there is still                
part of that statute that says that a person may not be required to            
perform an abortion, which has not be challenged at this point and             
still stands as good law.  Also, with regard to end of life issues,            
the  statutes which address those concerns do allow a health care              
provider to not pull the plug or to not pull out the tube.  So far             
as individuals are concerned, it his her interpretation of the law             
that they are protected.  However, she cautioned that when writing             
this kind of legislation, care has to taken as to what people can              
end up evoking as their reason for not informing people of the full            
array of health care solutions that may be legitimately available              
to them.  Ms. Bomengen also said there is  a legal question as to              
how the Valley Hospital case would apply  to Providence Hospital,              
and it not yet clear just how the three-pronged test developed in              
the Valley decision applies.                                                   
                                                                               
Number 577                                                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN questioned if a private hospital can prohibit                   
abortions in their facilities, as well as the number of private                
hospitals in the state.  MS. BOMENGEN acknowledged that private                
hospitals can prohibit abortions, but she didn't know the number of            
private hospitals in the state.                                                
                                                                               
TAPE 98-16, SIDE B                                                             
Number 584                                                                     
                                                                               
JANET OATES, Director of Marketing and Government Relations for                
Providence Health System in Alaska, expressed support for CSSB
348(STA) because accompanied by Senator Miller's proposed                      
constitutional amendment it would resolve the issue raised by the              
Valley Hospital Supreme Court ruling.  Providence Health System                
sees this as an issue of choice; the ability or the right for                  
Providence or other hospitals to choose not to do abortions or                 
other procedures in their facilities that don't conform to their               
religious and ethical values.                                                  
                                                                               
Ms. Oates said the attorneys that represent Providence Health                  
System feel that the Supreme Court decision identified a need for              
a conscience clause or something similar to that in the Alaska                 
Constitution.  Without such language, the court found that the                 
state law, which currently allows hospitals freedom of choice, is              
unconstitutional as applied to quasi-public hospitals; however, the            
definition given a quasi-public hospital is so broad that it could             
apply to every single hospital in the state of Alaska.                         
                                                                               
In response to Senator Mackie's earlier inquiry about what happens             
at Providence Hospital when the life of a mother is at risk, Ms.               
Oates said that's the time when their ethics committee is called in            
and those very tough decisions are made when a therapeutic abortion            
is necessary.  She also noted that advance directives are very                 
helpful for their ethicists and their  clergy as they are dealing              
with families at the end of a life.                                            
                                                                               
Number 525                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR DUNCAN asked Ms. Oates what she meant by "other procedures"            
at the beginning of her testimony.  MS. OATES responded that the               
language applied more to some of the earlier variations of the                 
constitutional amendment she had testified on, and she corrected               
her statement to say  "the right to choose not to do abortions or              
end the life of an individual."  She also clarified to Senator                 
Duncan that it is her interpretation that this applies to elective             
abortions only.                                                                
                                                                               
Number 491                                                                     
                                                                               
                                                                               
DR. GERALD PHILLIPS, testifying from the Mat-So LIO in support of              
CSSB 348(STA), said he is a radiologist, specifically, and he does             
diagnostic imaging.  One of the services provided is ultrasound,               
which is very good for evaluation of fetal development.  Both the              
radiologist and the ultrasound technician is involved in the                   
performance and the interpretation of the ultrasound exam, and at              
times they become involved with pre-abortion evaluations where they            
are asked for the size and dates in those planning an abortion.  He            
said you can feel and often know at times that the information                 
being given by dating the fetus by the ultrasound below a certain              
age is like signing its death warrant.  Specifically, below a                  
certain age the fetus is smaller and is therefore easier to abort              
and is less traumatic to the mother.  He said in these situations,             
the radiologist and the technician feel like accomplices.                      
                                                                               
Dr. Phillips related another situation which he said occurs                    
infrequently, but is more grave.  On three occasions, he and one of            
his technicians have been called in to do ultrasounds on patients              
who were pregnant and were bleeding.  However, unknown to them was             
that the ladies in question were bleeding because they were part               
way through abortions and they didn't have all the pieces accounted            
for.  He said his technician and himself felt taken in and outright            
lied to, and it is a haunting feeling to be part of something that             
results in the elimination of life.                                            
                                                                               
Dr. Phillips said because of these situations, he, the hospital and            
his community have lost at least two excellent ultrasound                      
technicians.                                                                   
                                                                               
Number 452                                                                     
                                                                               
DR. WILLIAM RESINGER, testifying from the Mat-Su LIO, said he is               
radiologist at Valley Hospital, and when he graduated from medical             
school in 1969 he took the Hippocratic Oath.  He pointed out that              
the Hippocratic Oath very specifically forbids euthanasia and                  
abortion.  It is a 2,400-year-old tradition, and it has nothing to             
do with state money or federal money or anything else except a                 
tradition in medicine to do the highest and best for their                     
patients.  He said it is not the only reason that he does not                  
support abortion, but it is a strong one.                                      
                                                                               
Dr. Resinger said it has been said that you cannot legislate                   
morality, but he believes you cannot legislate without morality,               
and just because something is legal does not necessarily mean it is            
moral.  He believes that there are laws of God that are higher than            
laws of men.  He said this issue comes to some very basic values,              
that a physician has a right to have conscience, follow moral                  
values and abide by his Hippocratic Oath.                                      
                                                                               
Dr. Resinger voiced his support for CSSB 348(STA) and the                      
constitutional amendment.                                                      
                                                                               
Number 426                                                                     
                                                                               
CLIFF ORME, the Administrator of Valley Hospital testifying from               
the Mat-Su LIO, said he concurred with the testimony given by Ms.              
Oates, Dr. Phillips and Dr. Resinger.  He said they are hopeful                
that this legislation will offer more choice to the providers who              
choose not to be a part of controversial procedures.                           
                                                                               
Mr. Orme said there has been discussion on the impact of either the            
constitutional amendment or this bill being to eliminate the                   
service being provided in Alaska and discriminating against the                
poor, in particular, who cannot afford to leave the state to                   
receive the procedure.  However, he pointed out that the hospital              
is not the only place to receive an abortion.  Most abortions are              
performed during the first trimester, out of the hospital setting,             
so to say that an abortion would not be available should something             
like this bill pass would be incorrect.                                        
                                                                               
Number 402                                                                     
                                                                               
DIANA BUFFINGTON, the Republican District Chairman in Kodiak,                  
testifying from Kodiak in support of CSSB 348(STA), spoke to a                 
recent stay at Providence Hospital in Anchorage.  When she was                 
admitted to the hospital she was asked if she had a living will in             
place, and she has no doubt that her beliefs and her moral                     
convictions of not being kept on life support would be honored by              
her hospital.  She does not believe that the legislation has                   
anything to do with a living will or with therapeutic abortion.                
The legislation is to prevent doctors or hospitals or clinics who              
do not agree with the abortion issue, who do not agree with the                
euthanasia issue, that they would have the right to not counsel or             
advise or recommend those procedures simply because it is an                   
effective way to end a pregnancy or to end a life. She does not                
believe that doctors should be kept from performing procedures they            
feel are safe and necessary to the commitment of life, and neither             
should an institution be forced to counsel and advise when it                  
violates the moral or religious convictions of its board of                    
directors, administrators, or shareholders.                                    
                                                                               
Number 353                                                                     
                                                                               
There being no further testimony on CSSB 348(STA), CHAIRMAN GREEN              
stated the legislation would be held in committee until the                    
following week for further review and possible changes.                        
                                                                               
                                                                               
Number 348                                                                     
                CSHB 449(STA) - ROSH IRA EXEMPTION                             
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN brought CSHB 449(STA) before the committee as the               
next order of business.                                                        
                                                                               
JOE BALASH, staff to Representative Gene Therriault who is prime               
sponsor of HB 449, read the following sponsor statement into the               
record:                                                                        
                                                                               
"Under the Alaska Exemptions Act, retirement plans are protected               
from creditor claims.  However, it does so by listing each type of             
retirement plan by reference to the Internal Revenue Code section              
governing that plan.  HB 449 will expand the list to include the               
newly created Roth IRA.                                                        
                                                                               
"The 1997 Taxpayer Relief Act passed by Congress created the Roth              
IRA account under Internal Revenue Code section 408A.                          
Contributions and earnings from traditional IRAs can be rolled over            
into a new Roth IRA.  However, when the rollover is done, the taxes            
must be paid on the capital gains realized.  To soften this -                  
potential tax bite, Congress has allowed all of the taxable income             
stemming from rollovers done in 1998 to be spread over a four year             
period.                                                                        
                                                                               
"This is a great opportunity to convert all future IRA account                 
earnings into tax-free income and spread the current tax bite over             
four years.  However, those Alaskans who take advantage of this are            
removing their assets from the list of those protected under state             
law.                                                                           
                                                                               
"This option is available only during 1998.  Beginning in 1999,                
distributions from regular IRA accounts that are rolled into Roth              
IRAs will be fully taxed in the year of the rollover.  In order for            
Alaskans to maintain their protection while taking advantage of                
this opportunity, legislation must be passed this session."                    
                                                                               
Number 320                                                                     
                                                                               
There being no questions or further testimony on HB 449, CHAIRMAN              
GREEN asked for the pleasure of the committee.                                 
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE moved CSHB 449(STA) and the accompanying zero fiscal            
note be passed out of committee with individual recommendations.               
Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.                                       
                                                                               
             SB 287 - WAIVER OF PAROLE CONSIDERATION                           
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN brought SB 287 before the committee as the final                
order of business.                                                             
                                                                               
Number 314                                                                     
                                                                               
ANNETTE KREITZER, staff to Senator Loren Leman who is the prime                
sponsor of SB 287, read the following sponsor statement into the               
record:                                                                        
                                                                               
"In 1994, the Legislature passed, and the voters approved a                    
constitutional amendment that strengthened the rights of victims of            
crime.  Among the rights enumerated is the right of a victim to be             
present at parole hearings.                                                    
                                                                               
"Senate Bill 287 addresses the emotional trauma for victims when an            
inmate, eligible for parole, waives that parole hearing and                    
essentially ends up on an automatic schedule of reappearances                  
before the Parole Board.                                                       
                                                                               
"This situation is not a common one, but it is still traumatic for             
the victim of the victim's family to gird themselves up for a                  
planned parole hearing and to have that hearing canceled within 24             
hours at the direction of the inmate, only then to be rescheduled              
and canceled every 30 days.                                                    
                                                                               
"This bill puts the inmate on a schedule set by the Board, while               
meeting the ex post facto requirements of Alaska's Constitution in             
Article I, Sections 1 and 7 and the U.S. Constitution in Article I,            
Section 15.                                                                    
                                                                               
"The bill is supported by Victims for Justice."                                
                                                                               
Ms. Kreitzer said the sponsor acknowledges, along with                         
representatives from the Parole Board, that this is not a common               
situation, but the bill tightens a loophole and puts the inmate on             
the schedule of the Parole Board.  If an inmate waives their right             
to a hearing, it puts the inmate on a six-month schedule to come               
back before the board.                                                         
                                                                               
Ms. Kreitzer directed attention to a proposed committee substitute,            
which was drafted after discussions with the Parole Board.                     
                                                                               
Number 284                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE moved the adoption of CSSB 287(STA) as a working                
document.  Hearing no objection, the motion carried.                           
                                                                               
MS. KREITZER explained that in subsection (d) on page 1, the                   
committee substitute seeks to make plain that rather than before               
the issuance of the board's decision, it is actually talking about             
the hearing.  This subsection would apply to a hearing on a                    
prisoner's application for discretionary parole.  Also, a sentence             
was added on line 14 providing that if a prisoner who has applied              
for a discretionary parole fails to appear for a scheduled hearing             
when  requested to appear, the board shall consider the prisoner's             
application as being withdrawn under this subsection.  That was                
contained in the regulation that is being annulled in Section 2.               
She added that nothing in the legislation prohibits the department             
from coming back in the future and writing a new regulation that's             
clearer.                                                                       
                                                                               
Number 251                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE questioned the need for the bill if the problem is              
with a Department of Corrections' regulation.  MS. KREITZER                    
responded that it is a small problem and it's not something the                
department may want to take up in regulation.  SENATOR MACKIE said             
he has a problem with trying to legislate regulations.                         
                                                                               
Number 190                                                                     
                                                                               
MICHAEL STARK, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, who              
serves as counsel to the Department of Corrections and to the                  
Parole Board, said both the Department of Correction and the Parole            
Board are sensitive to the needs of victims and try to accommodate             
those whenever possible; however, they do not believe that SB 287              
is necessary, that it addresses a problem that doesn't exist.  He              
said the incident that occurred, which was the catalyst for this               
bill, was one individual who had applied for parole and shortly                
before the scheduled hearing withdrew his application because he               
wanted to get an independent psychiatric examination, hoping that              
such an examination would improve his chances for parole.  So the              
individual had a legitimate basis for asking the Board to postpone             
his hearing.  The scheduled hearing was canceled, the victim was               
notified, and the victim was unhappy about that incident.                      
                                                                               
Mr. Stark said the legislation will not fix the problem it is                  
attempting to fix.  What it will do is make that prisoner                      
ineligible to apply for parole for another six-month period.                   
However, when the prisoner applies again and if  something comes up            
and the prisoner decides to withdraw his application again at the              
last minute, the victim will have to be notified again at the last             
minute.                                                                        
                                                                               
Number 150                                                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN GREEN asked how soon, under current regulation, a hearing             
can be rescheduled if a prisoner cancels a scheduled hearing.  MR.             
STARK  replied that the Parole Board meets quarterly on                        
discretionary parole applications, and the regulations require that            
a prisoner submit an application at least seven weeks before the               
next scheduled hearing in order to be considered.  He added that he            
does not believe the Board, without statutory authority, can say               
that a person won't be heard for six more months.  He thinks under             
existing statute they probably have a right to be considered if                
they meet the requirement in submitting their application at least             
seven weeks in advance.  He reiterated that this type of incident              
has not been a problem.                                                        
                                                                               
Number 125                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR WARD said this bill is reacting to a victim, and he asked              
Mr. Stark what harm he sees with the legislation.  MR. STARK                   
responded that he doesn't see any egregious harm with the adoption             
of the bill.                                                                   
                                                                               
SENATOR WARD said if there is no harm to it, and if it makes the               
victims more comfortable to know that there is a procedure in                  
place, would that be in the Parole Board's opinion a good policy,              
or do they not consider the victim into the scenario.  MR. STARK               
answered that the Board is very concerned about victims and any                
inconvenience that might be imposed on them, but they don't believe            
this bill addresses that.  If the prisoner resubmits his                       
application in six more months, the very same thing could occur.               
                                                                               
Number 070                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR DUNCAN moved that CSSB 287(STA) be passed out of committee.            
CHAIRMAN GREEN objected and stated that the committee needs to take            
more testimony on the bill before moving it out.  A roll call vote             
was taken with the following result:  Senator Duncan voted "Yea"               
and Senators Ward, Mackie and Green voted "Nay."  CHAIRMAN GREEN               
stated the motion failed.                                                      
Number 025                                                                     
                                                                               
There being no further business to come before the committee, the              
meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m.                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects