HOUSE BILL NO. 67 "An Act relating to eligibility for and payments of public assistance; and providing for an effective date." VICKY BORREGO, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICE spoke in opposition to HB 67. She stressed that HB 67 would: * Reduce the amount of public assistance grants Alaskan families may receive. * Take out any cost of living allowances available through the law beginning January 1, 1994. * Rollback public assistance benefit levels to what was in effect on January 1, 1990. Ms. Borrego noted that the most needy senior citizens and disabled adults will be affected. Seniors will lose as much as $36 dollars a month. An estimated 23,000 dependent children will be affected. She maintained that HB 67 does not promote greater self-sufficiency, independence or 8 empowerment but reduces an already spartan monthly benefit. She felt that other options should be sought before taking away basic benefits. RUTH GULYAS, OLDER ALASKANS COMMISSION spoke against HB 67. She stressed that poor seniors and disabled adults will loose $36.00 dollars a month. The Older Alaskans Commission (OAC) is concerned about the bill's effects on poor Alaskans, Children and disabled adults. She stressed that nearly 14 percent of Alaskans over the age of 65 are recipients of old age assistance. she observed that many seniors and all disabled adults under age 65 are not covered by Medicare. She noted that Alaska has a high percentage of persons who are not eligible for social security benefits. The Commission feels that seniors are not likely to be able to reverse their current economic situations. SHERRIE GOLL, ALASKA WOMEN'S LOBBY spoke in opposition to HB 67. She asserted that HB 67 contains the "most sweeping set of cuts to public assistance that has ever been considered by the Alaska Legislature." She maintained that HB 67 contains everything that can be done to reduce benefits to poor people. She noted that testimony in previous hearings have been overwhelmingly against HB 67. She asserted that HB 67 will be particularly devastating to rural Alaskans. Ms. Goll reiterated statistics noted by the previous two speakers. She noted that there are 5,438 disabled and 89 blind adults that will be affected. She denied that people move to Alaska to receive higher AFDC benefits. She maintained that the growth in caseload for public assistance programs has remained constant in comparison to population growth. She noted that an additional growth in caseload resulted from federally mandated changes in program eligibility. She stressed that the standard of need is the standard of basic decency and health. She maintained that the basic standard of decency and health will no longer be met if HB 67 is passage. Ms. Goll noted that AFDC is designed to help parents of children to get back into the job market. She asserted that adult public assistance clients have little chance of improving their financial picture. She stressed that the alternative to assistance is institutionalization. She noted that one in five children are dependent on AFDC. Eighteen percent of Alaskan children are involved in the program. She emphasized that other assistance programs are also being reduced. There is a three year waiting list for assisted housing in Juneau. The poor spend 70 percent of their income on housing. They will pay 78 percent if HB 67 passes. She asserted that Permanent Fund Dividend checks 9 are not spent on luxuries. Ms. Goll stated that unemployed parents should be targeted by jobs programs. She urged the Committee to consider the Adult Public Assistance Program separate from AFDC. She stressed that CSHB 67 (HESS) goes further than the Administration planned. She maintained that the Administration did not intend to delete the COLA.