HB 178-MEDICAL DEBT: INFORMATION, DISCRIMINATION  3:35:30 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 178, "An Act relating to medical debt and consumer credit reporting agencies; relating to discriminatory practices based on the medical debt of a person; and providing for an effective date." 3:35:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE GENEVIEVE MINA, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, answered questions during the hearing on HB 178. She introduced herself for the public record. 3:36:21 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated prior testimony mentioned federal preemption and asked whether the proposed legislation would preempt federal policy. 3:37:22 PM CONRAN GUNTHER, Legislative Counsel, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, replied that there were both express preemption concerns and conflict preemption concerns. He explained that the express preemption concerns related to provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) that clarify what could be subject to state regulation. He noted that there were some areas of HB 178, such as the provisions regarding transmittable (indisc.) debt, that were unclear as to whether they fell under subjects prohibited from state regulation by FCRA. He explained that conflict preemption was a type of preemption where it is not possible to comply with both state and federal laws simultaneously. He noted that there are some provisions of HB 178 that create conflict preemption concerns or could violate federal law. MR. GUNTHER, in response to an additional question from Representative Saddler, noted that the conflict preemption was a larger concern. 3:39:53 PM BRAD LIPTON, Senior Fellow, Consumer Federation of America (CFA), argued that there was neither an express preemption concern nor a conflict preemption concern. He stated that the opinion from Mr. Gunther cited an older case from 2015. He referred to a case out of the First Circuit, CDA v. Frey, a more recent case, which he asserted proved that the provisions of HB 178 were not preempted. MR. LIPTON additionally argued that Alaska residents would not be worse off should HB 178 be preempted, stating that Alaska would "be back where we started," should there be federal preemption. 3:41:57 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that he was not inclined to pass laws, not knowing whether they were legal or not. He recommended exercising caution. 3:42:38 PM The committee took a brief at-ease at 3:42 p.m. 3:43:32 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HB 178, labeled 34-LS0569\N.3, Gunther, 5/1/25, which read as follows: Page 1, line 5, through page 2, line 27: Delete all material. Page 2, line 28: Delete "Sec. 2" Insert "Section 1" Delete "a new subsection" Insert "new subsections" Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 3, following line 13: Insert a new subsection to read: "(c) In this section, "medical debt" has the meaning given in AS 45.85.800(c)." Page 3, lines 14 - 15: Delete all material. Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. 3:44:13 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER objected. He stated that he was not comfortable entertaining the amendment, given that it was put before the committee on short notice. 3:44:33 PM REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked if the sponsor could speak to the amendment. 3:44:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE MINA clarified that the amendment was not related to preemption; rather, the amendment concerned a provision of the bill regarding employment. CO-CHAIR FIELDS [moved to] withdraw Amendment 1 to HB 178. [The amendment was treated as withdrawn.] He queried the next committee of referral. 3:45:36 PM The committee took a brief at-ease at 3:45 p.m. 3:45:41 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that HB 178 was held over.