HB 471 - REPAY GRADUATE EDUCATION AID Number 075 CO-CHAIR BUNDE presented the sponsor statement. He said Alaska has two graduate education programs in the medical field that are very expensive and obviously useful education because they deal with the medical community. There have been varying levels of success with Alaskans who are subsidized by these programs returning to practice medicine in Alaska. It has been an ongoing quest of Co-Chair Bunde's to maximize the return on the state's investment in their students. He remarked there are a number of ways that can be accomplished. One way would be to spread the approximate $1.6 million cost of the programs per year for 40 students through the entire university community. The University of Alaska Fairbanks, University of Alaska Anchorage and University of Alaska Southeast could each be asked what they could do with an additional $500,000 and if it would be a good investment having that money impact 20,000 or 30,000 students. The existing programs which take $1.6 million a year to finance the education of only 40 students could be continued. His frustration is that only a small number of those students return and practice medicine in Alaska. Co-Chair Bunde said last year the Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education (WICHE) program was not funded. He has been contacted by parents and members of the medical community who are willing to pay the cost if the program is continued. They want students to have access to the program. On the other hand, there are students in the WAMI (Washington, Alaska, Montana and Idaho) program who have indicated they won't have anything to do with it if it is changed to a loan program. Co-Chair Bunde said he had some problems with these students asking for a great deal of money from the state and not willing to be at least partially responsible for it. In conclusion, he said these two programs could continue and the amount of money he is addressing is the subsidy paid by the state that is the difference between the resident tuition in the state the student attends and the nonresident tuition. The administrative costs which are very high are not being addressed. The loan would be forgiven for the student who partakes of this program and then returns to the state to practice in their field in Alaska for a minimum of five years. If, however, that student chooses to work in the Lower 48, then the student would repay Alaska for the subsidy he/she received. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY added that the WAMI program has been in effect since 1971 and 134 Alaskans have taken part in it. To date, 23 of those are doctors practicing in Alaska. WENDY REDMAN, Vice President, Statewide University System, University of Alaska, interjected it was 46 not 23 doctors. CO-CHAIR BUNDE commented there seems to be some confusion on the numbers. The agencies that support the program count everybody who has ever been in the WAMI program who come to Alaska and work as a benefit from the program. He pointed out there are students from Washington and Oregon who come to Alaska to do an internship and return to Alaska to practice, but they are not the people Alaska has invested money in. The rates for qualified Alaskans who go into the program and return to Alaska vary, but are as low as a 2 percent return. Number 422 REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE asked if Co-Chair Bunde had had any discussions with bond counsel relating to the insertion of a forgiveness provision into the student loan program. CO-CHAIR BUNDE replied that only general fund monies were involved. Number 454 MS. REDMAN said there are currently 46 Alaskan students who went through the WAMI program practicing in the state of Alaska. That is not the equivalent rate, and she thinks the equivalent rate is what Co-Chair Bunde was referring to. She added that in addition to the 46 students, there is a total of 107 out of 134 WAMI educated doctors practicing in the state of Alaska. Of the 107 doctors, 46 are Alaskan students which is about a 43 percent return rate. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said he wouldn't argue with those figures, but pointed out that some classes have 2 out of 10 students who return while other classes may have more. He is of the opinion that when the state has invested in excess of $160,000 in a student's education, the return should be 100 percent. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked if there were further questions or testimony. Hearing none, he closed public testimony. Number 592 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE moved to pass HB 471 out of committee with individual recommendations. CO-CHAIR BUNDE explained that a technical amendment was needed because there was some conflicting language; the original bill indicated repayment would begin within one year and other student loans are paid (indisc.). REPRESENTATIVE BRICE withdrew the motion. Number 634 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to adopt Amendment 1. Hearing no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 642 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE moved to pass CSHB 471(HES) out of committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal note. Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.