Number 111 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT asked why the administration introduced HB 81 instead of supporting SB 6. Number 120 COMMISSIONER USERA explained the SB 6 annuity phase out. The participation was unrealistic, she believed. Number 226 REPRESENTATIVE HARLEY OLBERG thought the annuity was the same as a savings account. Number 231 COMMISSIONER USERA agreed and further explained annuity accounts and actuaries. Number 255 REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG stated an annuity savings program could be bought by anyone through an insurance company. Number 261 COMMISSIONER USERA agreed. Number 263 CHAIRMAN VEZEY discussed taxes with regard to the longevity bonus. Number 267 COMMISSIONER USERA discussed tax implications and liability. Number 277 CHAIRMAN VEZEY thanked Commissioner Usera and began taking public testimony. Number 471 JOHN J. SHAFFER testified via teleconference from Sitka, on behalf of the American Association of Retired People. He agreed the longevity bonus needed to be reformed. He favored the annuity program in SB 6, and explained the value of the longevity bonus for seniors. Number 510 MS. STERLING suggested the committee review a report regarding older Alaskan senior citizens' impact on the economy of Alaska. Number 539 ROSE PALMQUIST testified via teleconference from Mat-Su in opposition to HB 81. She supported SB 6. Number 604 HUGH JOHNSON testified via teleconference from Mat-Su. He discussed the contribution of older Alaskans. He favored the longevity bonus. Number 640 MS. PALMQUIST reiterated her support for SB 6. Number 159 ROSE FELTZ, a member of the MAT-SU SENIOR CITIZENS' ADVISORY BOARD, testified via teleconference from Mat-Su in support of SB 6. "I was born in Alaska and I am 57 years old now. When I turn 65 there will be a law suit if I am treated differently than other senior citizens who receive the bonus," she said. Number 191 GLORIA MASCHMEYER testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She requested clarification of the SB 6 annuity program versus the phase out plan. She did not understand why anyone would want to put their Permanent Fund monies into a state annuity program. Number 314 REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS stated SB 6 annuity was a volunteer program. Number 348 COMMISSIONER USERA said the SB 6 annuity program was extremely complex and impractical. Number 359 MS. MASCHMEYER was interested in the longevity bonus and would retire in Alaska. "I would not personally deposit my Permanent Fund in a state annuity account because it is not refundable and would not be inherited by my family upon my death," she said. Number 378 CHAIRMAN VEZEY said the option to put permanent funds into a savings plan of choice may be best. Number 383 REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG agreed that when seniors turned 65 and were not eligible for a longevity check there would be lawsuits. Number 478 MS. STERLING noted there were four bills on this topic: HB 81, SB 6, SB 58, and HB 77, each of which had its own weakness. She asked if the program could be based on need. Number 491 REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG discussed needs' based programs. Many people with needs would not utilize available programs because of pride, he said. MS. STERLING pointed out social security and medicaid did not have a stigma attached to them. Number 511 COMMISSIONER USERA discussed needs' based programs in the Department of Administration such as the Older Alaskans Commission and the Pioneer Home. She claimed there was a network of support for senior citizens and that assistance for senior citizens had expended.