SHES - 3/25/95 SB 98 PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1995  Number 002 CHAIRMAN GREEN called the Senate Health, Education and Social Services (HESS) Committee to order at 1:15 p.m. She introduced SB 98 as the only order of business before the committee. She then called the first person to testify. KIM SWIFT, testifying from Mat-Su, discussed her brother's situation. Her brother is very poor, but somehow manages to stay off welfare and attend night school even with two daughters. She praised the committee for reviewing welfare reform. ROBERT HANSEN, testifying from Mat-Su, explained that due to an accident he had been dubbed a retard. He said that he could not find a job. Although he has changed his ways from alcohol and drugs to raising a family, the state wants to penalize him. Mr. Hansen emphasized that SB 98 used the term reform not elimination. LARRY BUCHHOLZ, Self Help for the Hard of Hearing Alaskans, said that he was present to heighten the committee's awareness of hard of hearing communication issues as they apply to the funding support. SENATOR ELLIS asked Mr. Buchholz to familiarize the committee with some of the issues that hard of hearing Alaskans on assistance face when attempting self-sufficiency. What are the employment opportunities for deaf and hard of hearing people? Senator Ellis commented that welfare reform tries to promote self-sufficiency although, some law-makers may not realize who is on the welfare rolls and how self-sufficient they really are. Number 096 LARRY BUCHHOLZ stated that he faces insurmountable challenges when attempting to find employment for deaf and hard of hearing individuals. He explained that the communication impaired culture and deaf persons must access sign language which poses difficulties in lay life. Although deaf persons would be hired and their employers would work with them to learn communication systems, that employment seldom works out long-term. He noted that this creates the need to periodically revisit job placement. He pointed out that in normal hearing situations language is misunderstood, but with the hearing impaired the misunderstanding increases which causes the hearing impaired individual to isolate themselves. KATIE HURLEY, testifying from Mat-Su, informed the committee that she had just returned from the Governor's Prayer Breakfast in Anchorage. The guest speaker was Dr. Tony Campola, an Evangelical Christian, who addressed the need for everyone to help those in need in our communities, state and nation. She said that there is no love or caring in SB 98. She objected to the singling out of young women for punishment. Ms. Hurley commented that there is much discussion about pregnant teens, crack mothers, and welfare queens; where are the impregnating teens, crack fathers and welfare kings? She asked where the jobs were that welfare recipients are expected to get. Number 168 CHAIRMAN GREEN pointed out that SB 98 as well as the governor's bill were attempting to address that issue. SENATOR ELLIS asked if the religious leader Ms. Hurley had spoken of had discussed the religious communities attitude toward the provisions of the welfare changes. KATIE HURLEY said that Dr. Campola had apologized for those Christian leaders who had not helped those at the bottom of the scale. Ms. Hurley commented that many people applauded Dr. Campola. SENATOR ELLIS noted that he had heard nothing from Alaskan religious leaders regarding the provisions that many believe will increase the abortion rate. There also has been no testimony regarding whether churches would be willing to come forward and help if federal and state level cuts are made. KATIE HURLEY commented that she had urged fellow congregation members to come to these hearings. Ms. Hurley did not understand why they did not come; that serves as a witness to the teachings of Jesus. Ms. Hurley informed everyone that Dr. Campola would be in Juneau this weekend. SENATOR LEMAN noted that he too had attended the Governor's Prayer Breakfast. He said that people hear what they want to hear. Dr. Campola discussed the need to provide for the poor and needy among us, but he did not suggest that it be provided by the government. Senator Leman stated that Dr. Campola suggested that people as individuals should become involved. Senator Leman asked if Robert Blackmon could testify next due to his wife's medical emergency. Number 232 ROBERT BLACKMON, testifying from Anchorage, stated that Representative Pete Kott would help the handicapped and disabled. He inquired as to what happens when their dividends are taken away. He informed the committee that he and his wife, who is disabled, were on a fixed income. He explained that if they lose their dividend they would not have any transportation. Mr. Blackmon asked about the welfare for the handicap. CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that SB 98 does not intend to impact handicap individuals in any way. She noted that work on programs for the developmentally disabled had not yet begun. SENATOR ELLIS pointed out that SB 98, the current version, does not contain the hold harmless issue. Senator Phillips and Representative Kott have bills that would deny permanent fund dividends to people who receive assistance; those bills are much further along in the legislative process toward becoming law. Senator Ellis acknowledged that who would be denied dividends is a complicated process. He encouraged Mr. Blackmon to follow those bills and said that he would send him information regarding the current status of those bills. Senator Ellis noted that SB 98 does include rateable reductions for Adult Public Assistance (APA) and AFDC as well as changes in the Medicaid and General Relief Assistance Programs. He urged Mr. Blackmon to get a copy of SB 98 and review the rateable reductions. TONY RAUH, testifying from Anchorage, informed the committee that he and his wife were both disabled. Both receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI), APA, and medical coupons. He indicated that while the State of Alaska wants to cut those programs, the last governor had large travel expenses to the lower 48. He suggested that travel expenses be cut instead of the budget. He urged the committee not to cut the services of SSI, APA, and medical coupons for the disabled. He stated that persons who receive AFDC should have a percentage of their permanent fund dividend withheld. Number 296 DAVID WOLFE informed the committee that he is an Eligibility Technician III who investigates allegations of welfare fraud for the Division of Public Assistance in the Department of Health and Social Services. He supported SB 98; it is a good first step towards eliminating this problem from society. He stated that welfare fraud is rampant in Alaska. He suggested that based upon his experience, about 30 to 50 percent of welfare cases are based on fraudulent information. This percentage would increase in the rural areas. He asserted that the current welfare system in Alaska does nothing more than subsidize non-productivity. Alaska's benefit levels are the highest in the nation which attract recipients to Alaska in great numbers. Mr. Wolfe stated that former director, Jan Hansen, did everything in her power to convince the previous legislature and governor that welfare fraud was not a problem in Alaska. He opposed Ms. Hansen and said that people are coming to Alaska for the higher welfare benefits. The recipients who come to Alaska for the benefits come from states with stricter fraud control; they know how to manipulate the system. Alaska's generous benefits do not provide an incentive to go off the program. He noted that Alaska's programs seem to give more discretionary income to a recipient than someone who has to work for their income. He expressed much frustration with the fraud in Alaska. Mr. Wolfe explained that the fraud division in Anchorage does a admirable job with its limited resources. Jan Hansen cut four positions in the division. Sometimes it takes up to six months after fraud has been discovered to even assign an investigator. He recognized that there are truly needy people who need assistance until they become self-sufficient. He said that he has seen too many adults teach their children how to receive welfare when they grow up. The system is broken and needs to be fixed now. He stated that benefit levels should be reduced drastically. Mr. Wolfe indicated that individuals should not be in a position where welfare pays more than a good paying job. SENATOR LEMAN expressed interest in having Mr. Wolfe's written testimony. He felt that the issues of fraud and the migration of people to Alaska for the welfare benefits should be pursued by the committee. Senator Leman noted that other case workers had conveyed the same information as Mr. Wolfe. SENATOR ELLIS asked if Mr. Wolfe had said that Jan Hansen had cut four people from the fraud unit. DAVID WOLFE explained that Ms. Hansen cut four positions, two of which were funded but were not filled and the other two were laid off. Number 367 SENATOR ELLIS asked if those cuts had any connection to the funding level Ms. Hansen received or was it merely a discretionary measure. Senator Ellis noted that Governor Hickel had always said that fraud was a high priority. Ms. Hansen worked for Governor Hickel. Senator Ellis said that this sounded very interesting. DAVID WOLFE clarified that his testimony was his own personal opinion. In response to Senator Ellis, Mr. Wolfe claimed that Ms. Hansen was building her own empire. Ms. Hansen wanted to convince everyone that there was less than two to three percent fraud in the entire system. SENATOR ELLIS inquired as to Mr. Wolfe's opinion of the permanent fund dividend of people on public assistance. DAVID WOLFE felt that the aged, disabled and those who receive APA should retain their dividend. Of those receiving AFDC and Food Stamps, a limited amount should receive their dividend. Mr. Wolfe expressed the need to eliminate the hold harmless program for AFDC and food stamps. CHAIRMAN GREEN announced that testimony would need to be no more than three minutes due to the number of people remaining to testify. PUDGE KLEINKAUF, testifying from Anchorage, informed the committee that she was an attorney and a social worker and had been involved with AFDC. She directed the committee to page 4 of the CS. The section regarding ineligibility for assistance raises serious legal questions regarding an individual's constitutional right. Page 6, line 20 increases the amount of assistance to an individual who is caring for a child that would otherwise be eligible for AFDC. The section goes on to decrease the amount of assistance received by a parent for a dependent child. She could not believe that was what the committee had intended. Ms. Kleinkauf recommended amending the parentage establishment section on page 7, line 13. A child should not be penalized for the lengthy time it can take to establish parentage. She was applauded the JOBS section on page 8 which addresses previous concerns about the lack of child care and job training. She suggested that more money be directed towards jobs. In regard to page 9, Ms. Kleinkauf pointed out that the California Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had found the two-tier payment system to be unconstitutional. That issue is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. The decision is Green vs. Anderson. Number 428 CHAIRMAN GREEN informed Ms. Kleinkauf that many of her points were taken up yesterday in the department's testimony and several of the issues are being reviewed. Chairman Green noted that the Wisconsin two-tier system has not been challenged; it has been in place since July of 1994. She felt that the wording received the waiver after the California decision; its felt the rewording would allow this provision to be constitutional. LESTER CAIN, an owner and operator of a small mobile home park in Anchorage since 1975, explained that since the mobile home park has not been his sole source of income his rent has been kept at a reasonable level. He noted that he had many low income tenants due to the low rent. Over the past 20 years, Mr. Cain said that he has seen many abuses of the welfare system. He has had second and third generation welfare recipients who felt that assistance was their right and their job. Such individuals have no desire to seek employment because they can receive more money from assistance than through work. He discussed many examples of abuses of the welfare system. In conclusion, Mr. Cain suggested the following requirements: a residency requirement before applying for assistance is allowed, a job training and seeking requirement, and a time limit for able-bodied persons to be on the system. LYNNE MURPHY, representing Prisoner of Welfare Working on Winning, stated that they are for welfare reform, but our nose should not be cut off to spite our face. She expressed frustration with welfare fraud. She asserted that the legislators are illustrating the difference between the poor and rich in society. Ms. Murphy noted that she donates over 200 hours to Victims for Justice. She pointed out that SB 98 places the burden on the backs of the poor and the disabled, the next step will be the middle-class. After that the permanent fund will probably be eliminated. She declared that it is not fair and should be stopped. She emphasized that all this committee would accomplish is the segregation of another group. Ms. Murphy asserted that SB 98 should be rewritten in order to make it understandable for the minority group and it should be voted on. She suggested that the wealthy, a state worker earning $100,000 per year, donate their permanent fund dividend. Number 504 KIMBERLY ANSAKNOK, testifying from Fairbanks, explained that she has been labelled a bad mother when she did not have a job, when she placed her child in daycare, and later when she took time off to care for her child. She explained that the JOBS program has made it possible for her to further her education while still being able to raise her daughter. She stated that if the JOBS program receives funding cuts, she would not be able to continue the road toward self-sufficiency for herself and her daughter. DON SHIRCEL, an administrator responsible for a range of social security programs in the interior, stated that the CS for SB 98 is mean-spirited, ill-conceived, punitive to children and women, exclusive to rural families, and short-sighted. He noted the work being done with Congressman Young's office to craft federal legislation that would address the unique needs of all of Alaska's families and children. Congressman Young applauded the efforts of many Alaskan native groups who have already reformed welfare programs. The Alaska Federation of Natives and several native non- profits have been working with the Commissioner of DHSS and DCRA to explore creative options which would be tailored for all of Alaska's families to become more self-sufficient. Mr. Shircel recommended rewriting the bill in order to review a wider range of options. He expressed concern with the time limits in the bill; do you have the jobs for these people? The current legislation seems to have disincentives for families engaged in JOBS programming that would support them and allow them to obtain the skills of self-sufficiency. Mr. Shircel asked if the committee had considered that other federal funds are directly linked to the state's standard of payments. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) general assistance program was lauded in the Anchorage Daily News and the floor of the Congress as being a model program; that program is directly tied to Alaska's standard. He indicated that lowering the base would affect the BIA. He noted that 40 percent of all federally recognized tribes are located in Alaska. In conclusion, Mr. Shircel emphasized that this legislation significantly impacts families, children and tribes. Therefore, all the groups involved should come together to craft legislation that makes sense and will employ people. MARGE RUSSEL, testifying from Fairbanks, sympathized with everyone who bore the burden of welfare reform. She explained her personal experience with assistance programs which have allowed her to attend school. The cuts to welfare programs that are scheduled while placing money in programs that will not produce productive individuals that will contribute to society did not seem appropriate. This is not beneficial to Alaskan families. She emphasized that low paying jobs do not cover transportation, daycare, and living costs. Education is the key; cutting the funds of current educational programs will threaten the lives of Alaskans. She discussed how she utilizes her permanent fund dividend; it would hurt her to lose it. The program does need to be revamped because there is fraud, but those who do need assistance could benefit from the program which would benefit Alaska. SB 98 would hurt the truly needy people. TAPE 95-24, SIDE B Number 584 ROSALIE L'ECUYER felt that the bill appears to be hastily conceived without consideration of those who need assistance or the insufficiency of job opportunities, training and treatment programs. The bill would benefit state personnel who would receive the new jobs created to administer this cumbersome program while state expenditures are increased in order to design new regulations and support programs. Benefits would be decreased to the most needy. Ms. L'Ecuyer directed the committee to Section 8 when she asked if paragraph (3) meant that an elderly person's APA benefits, "a single-person household that does not consist of a dependent child," would face a $77 reduction in their benefits. AS 47.25.354 limits AFDC to two years, AS 47.25.311 limits AFDC benefits to five years which also mentions pregnant women; she did not know that a woman could be pregnant for five years. In regard to AS 47.07.022 which refers to fraud, Ms. L'Ecuyer commented that often state personnel treat all assistance recipients as potential perpetrators of fraud. She explained that there are those on assistance who do not read well and therefore, do not fully comprehend the intricacies of the system. She requested an impact study on this bill in order to establish who receives assistance, what programs are available, what new state operational costs would be, and what new state personnel would be hired. She urged the committee not to harm the women and children receiving AFDC. BARBARA AVILA stated that SB 98 is a good beginning. She felt that the principle behind welfare reform and the reduction of welfare fraud is commendable. However, Mr. Wolfe seemed to be unfairly judgmental to most welfare recipients. Welfare attempts to foster self-sufficiency and independence which should be remembered when considering welfare reform. Fraud cases cannot be used to generalize about all welfare recipients. She pointed out that SB 98 would increase the work of non-profit agencies. For example, if a welfare recipient has another child and does not receive any more assistance, the recipient would have to turn to the Food Bank, shelters and other non-profit agencies. She indicated the need to take time with this issue. Number 527 JOY GRIFFIN, a single mother, agreed with Ms. Avila that welfare fraud is the exception not the norm. She informed the committee that she was currently receiving AFDC, working, and participating in the JOBS program. She noted that she had one more class before she would graduate. SB 98 is unfair legislation. Welfare reform is necessary and this legislation could work if all the options are reviewed. She agreed with Section 28. Ms. Griffin pointed out that under provisions, recipients are not encouraged to take full- time low paying jobs due to the loss of Medicaid benefits. Medicaid benefits should be expanded or encourage employers to provide partial coverage. AFDC eligibility should be based upon net income and not the number of hours worked. She noted that this aspect could be written as a separate bill that could help people now. Ms. Griffin felt that the JOBS program works, but the program should target people who want to work. She commented that the encouragement should start at the beginning; when a client says they want to participate in the JOBS program, that should happen immediately. She emphasized that the committee should consider those who are not fraudulent, but who use the system as a temporary safety net. There are populations who are working hard. She concluded by asking the committee to remember those populations. SENATOR ELLIS announced that he was soliciting comments on the governor's welfare reform proposal, SB 111. SB 111 has some different approaches which he favored. He recommended that Ms. Griffin, Ms. Russel and others go to the Legislative Information Office in their area and request a copy of the Blueprint for Welfare Reform and make comments. HARVEY HARRIS, testifying from Glennallen, expressed concern with SB 98. He questioned where the jobs would be. He discussed the situation of rural areas with severe climates, the highest utility prices and the fewest jobs available in Alaska. What is going to happen to the elderly and the greatly disabled? He informed the committee of his mother's situation in which half of her income is used to pay for utilities and transportation. The cost of living in the Copper Valley is outrageous. He hoped that people would be kinder. Number 443 BILL SPENCER, testifying from Mat-Su, stated that SB 98 was a good idea, although it is not perfect. He applauded Section 47.25.352. As oil revenues fall, a manner in which to cut benefits must be developed. There should be fairness for those who will have to pick up the tab when oil revenues decline. He reiterated the concern regarding people moving to Alaska because of the benefits and other programs such as the permanent fund dividend. He discussed the influx into the Mat-Su valley. There is little work which makes it cheaper to live there, receive welfare, and not work; the local taxpayers pay for that. SB 98 is a good start. GINGER BAIM, testifying from Dillingham, stated that she is a life long resident of Alaska who has never received public assistance. She stated that there are many things wrong with SB 98. SB 98 starts with the wrong premise. She emphasized that this measure was an attack on the peace and dignity of women and children of Alaska. SB 98 is a short-sighted, unworkable, mean-spirited, politically motivated attack on all the Alaskans who have committed the crime of being poor. SB 98 is based on the premise that people receive welfare because they are lazy, irresponsible and do not want to work. She informed everyone that 20 percent of all groups, including legislators and non-profit agencies, are dead wood. Why would welfare recipients be any different. Ms. Baim pointed out that SB 98 requires welfare recipients to get jobs, drug and alcohol treatment, and perfect birth control; none of that exists. Welfare recipients are required not to be sick, forego health insurance, and never retire. She stated that 50 percent of the welfare recipients in Alaska are children under the age of 16. SB 98 does not speak to them, but rather addresses the parents who are responsible for the care and upbringing of those children. She emphasized that SB 98 would cut the benefits to these children if their parents fail to live up to those responsibilities. This bill is not going to work. She suggested doubling the minimum wage and providing universal health care in order to provide for appropriate welfare reform. Ms. Baim commented that one of the biggest barriers to leaving the welfare system is child care. Decent jobs and wages are necessary with a support system to enable people to become what they can. SB 98 should be reconsidered and based upon the premise that everyone is a free and independent human being with good motivations that care for everyone. Number 357 CARMEN LOWRY, testifying from Bethel, expressed outrage at SB 98. SB 98 places welfare reform on the backs of the children who are those that need the services most. She questioned the purpose of all the penalties in SB 98; who does it penalize? She felt that this would result in more neglected children who miss school. Reform should be a positive and empowering process. She stated that welfare recipients are not morally bad, they want opportunity. Ms. Lowry asked the following questions regarding SB 98: what is the reasoning behind time limits for AFDC recipients, what will happen to those children born while their mothers are on welfare, what are the long-term consequences of neglect, why should a family's level of funding be determined by their prior state of residence, how much would this save the state, where is the statistical data for this, do you believe that people come to Alaska to receive benefits, and why do you believe that poor people are trying to defraud the system. She recommended cutting the pension plans of state workers; that takes a lot of the state's money. She did not support any of the efforts to withhold the permanent fund dividend for individuals. MARK JENKINS recognized that welfare reform is a chief concern in reducing welfare dependency and the need to balance the state's budget. However, SB 98 merely attempts to cut and balance the budget on the backs of the poor. Historically, this has been done to continue the cycle of poverty. SB 98 will not reduce teen pregnancy, out of wedlock births, nor will it facilitate the movement from poverty to a middle-class lifestyle. He commented that this bill would negatively impact the most vulnerable poor group, children of poor children. He urged the committee to review the reality of life among the poor. Number 296 PENNY BOATMAN, representing Prisoners of Welfare Working on Winning, informed the committee that at their upcoming meeting voter registration would be held so people would be able to vote. She explained that the hold harmless was established in order to ensure that low income Alaskans could enjoy the permanent fund dividend on the same basis as other Alaskans without losing their eligibility for assistance. Without the hold harmless for the permanent fund dividend, families who receive AFDC, food stamps and APA would become ineligible for assistance for one month each year due to the retroactive budgeting of the assistance programs. She gave an example of the resulting situation. SENATOR LEMAN interjected that this hearing was for SB 98. He noted that Ms. Boatman's comments seemed to be directed to SB 37. PENNY BOATMAN said that she was attempting to put it all together. PENNY BOATMAN addressed a conversation that she had with Senator Phillips regarding the elimination of the hold harmless. Number 227 TOM SWANNER, Chairman of the Anchorage Evangelical Task Force, stated that the church is ready to take on the responsibility given to them by Jesus Christ. He addressed the source of the problem which he felt was cohabitation of couples. The source of children needing aid is fornication which is personal responsibility. He explained that Christians are the only group that says no to behavior that creates the problem in welfare. On the other hand, the state allows fornication. He noted that he had a case in the U.S. Supreme Court due to his denial of these type of renters in his rental units. JOANNE SWANNER stated that she and her husband, as property managers, see the welfare system up close. She agreed that some people are truly needy, however, there is a lot of abuse that she has seen. She discussed the abuses to the welfare system that she had observed. There are a lot of good provisions in SB 98; minors should be sent back to their homes where it is better for them. She said that people do move to Alaska to receive welfare benefits. Regarding the notion that there are no jobs available, there are many things that can be done out of the home. Number 122 YVONNE JACBSON, Director for the Alaska Alliance for the Mentally Ill, informed the committee that the alliance owns an apartment complex for the disabled. She felt that reducing AFDC when a child lives with their parent was wrong. SB 98 is mean-spirited. She urged everyone to review the governor's welfare reform bill. She explained that she had personally worked with individuals receiving interim assistance; how many people could live on $280 per month? Making people pay back interim assistance money after they are found to be ineligible does not make sense. This issue should attempt to empower people. LYNNE CORAL informed the committee that she is blind. She reiterated concerns with the interim assistance provision. She discussed the case in which a blind person must find transportation to get to the doctor's appointment in order to certify their legal blindness. This person may be poor and cannot pay for transportation or the appointment, not to mention that they would have to wait for the transportation and any needed tools such as a magnifier. SB 98 would increase the stress of those persons who are waiting for the determination of their eligibility. SB 98 is not going to help the disabled. She mentioned the increase in the per diem of state personnel and questioned what they would do if they were in the situation of needing interim assistance during the determination of a disability. SANDY SANDERSON, President of the Alaska Independent Blind, informed the committee that 80 percent of the nation is unemployed or underemployed. He suggested redrafting SB 98. Legislation such as SB 98 which affects the disabled, the elderly, those people who are not poor, but are down on their luck.... TAPE 95-25, SIDE A Number 018 In response to Mr. Wolfe's comments, Mr. Sanderson pointed out that Alaska has a high cost of living. He questioned why SB 98 would penalize the innocent when those who are fraudulent should be penalized. He asserted that the rhetoric about getting a job is merely that, rhetoric. He emphasized the need to honor welfare recipients; do not use them as a scapegoat. He reiterated the suggestion for legislators to donate their per diem which they did not need in the first place. THELMA BUCHHOLDT stated that she had been an Alaska Resident since 1965. She noted that she would address Sections 3, 4, and 17. She informed the committee that she would prepare some statements regarding the bill. CHAIRMAN GREEN interjected that she intended to remove the majority of Sections 3 and 4, and a portion of Section 7 of work draft O. THELMA BUCHHOLDT said that she would get the most recent copy of SB 98 and send the committee information regarding the Filipino Community of Anchorage. She expressed concern with the provision regarding aliens. The Filipino people have been in Alaska for a number of years and have helped build the state of Alaska. SB 98 seems to indicate that aliens are not regarded well in this state. Number 097 JODI DELANEY, testifying from Fairbanks, recounted her experience growing up in Alaska. She inquired as to what bureaucratic responsibility act would go along with SB 98. There is abuse in the job of the bureaucrats. She asked if the committee had a proposal changing how the system is run. CHAIRMAN GREEN explained that SB 98 attempts to make the system more flexible. JODI DELANEY discussed her situation in which she was denied unemployment benefits when she attended school out of state because she was not a full-time student. She said that she was forced onto the welfare roll. She discussed all the cuts that may happen and pointed out that people end up shuffling between state and federal programs. She thanked all the churches that have helped. She pointed out that when the state wants to save a program, they really work at it. In Anchorage, nine tables were set up in a mall in order to save the Women, Infants, and Children Nutrition (WIC) program. A lot of bureaucrats are merely saving their jobs. She emphasized the need for those bureaucrats to have the same interest in the families as the programs in which jobs would be lost. In conclusion, she urged the committee to listen to everyone because they live through the system. RONDI ALDRIDGE said that she was speaking for disabled individuals and those receiving medical and anyone who depends upon any of the state agencies. She informed the committee that her husband would probably be disabled for the rest of his life. They receive AFDC in order to support her three children which are not her husband's. Her children's father will not pay child support. She felt that taking away the permanent fund would penalize her family even more. She thanked Representative Davies for replying to her public opinion message regarding HB 98. Number 194 RONNIE ROSENBURG, Director of Case Management Services at the Fairbanks Resource Agency, informed the committee that she was a nurse and an attorney as well as the guardian for APA recipients with a traumatic brain injury such as June Weinstock. On behalf of Ms. Weinstock and the 62 developmentally disabled adults that she represents who experience a range of disabling conditions. She also noted that she was speaking as a certified Medicaid care coordinator. Section 8 paragraph (3) indicates a $77 reduction in APA benefits to single-person households containing disabled adults. This reduction must be reviewed in context. Last years Medicaid reductions and the Medicaid co-pay system eliminated dental, hearing, vision, and speech therapy services for that community. Her clients use those services in a much higher proportion than does the average community member. Ms. Rosenburg did not know how she would make ends meet for her clients when the loss of the permanent fund is considered as well as the federal plans to reduce Section VIII housing. Renting housing for disabled adults is very difficult. She stated that many of her clients have less than $2 per month left for discretionary spending. Reducing APA by $77 per month will not work. Furthermore, reducing their dividend would leave no money for their dental needs or their co-payments. She hoped that SB 98 would be reconsidered. CHAIRMAN GREEN commented that most of the issues concerning Ms. Rosenburg had been eliminated from SB 98. RONNIE ROSENBURG asked if paragraph (3) of Section 8 on page 7 of the version O CS was being eliminated. CHAIRMAN GREEN clarified that this language does not refer to APA. In response to Ms. Rosenburg, Chairman Green agreed that APA to disabled individuals would not be reduced. This language refers to AFDC. SENATOR ELLIS interjected that one could not receive AFDC unless they have children. RONNIE ROSENBURG asked how a single-person household that does not consist of a pregnant woman could receive AFDC. CHAIRMAN GREEN explained that it deals with a women who goes on public assistance when she is pregnant. That will be reviewed. Number 276 KATHRYN NINMER, testifying from Fairbanks, stated that SB 98 has good and bad provisions. She felt that it is a step backwards to suggest teen parents live with an adult in a foster home or a maternity home nor is it practical to make them live with their parents. Requiring a teen parent to remain at home until they receive their GED or high school diploma has great merits. Ms. Ninmer felt that requiring AFDC recipients to sign the personal responsibility contract is demeaning and belittling; this is an exercise in self destruction. Steps must be taken to prevent chronic welfarism, but the steps should be positive. She indicated that savings to the program could come from other sources such as expanding child support enforcement. Dead beat and absent parents should bear the majority of the responsibility of housing and feeding their children. She also suggested strengthening fraud investigation. Ms. Ninmer emphasized that the issue should be kept in perspective. Many families have used the AFDC programs on a temporary basis until they are on their feet. The free loaders and abusers of the system should be eliminated. The important factor is to make it inviting to become independent not impossible to do the best in a bad situation. She pointed out that legislators should remember that when they use public money for their power lunches, travel expenses and hotel bills, the money is reimbursable because money is available that could have fed innocent children. She urged the rejection of SB 98 as currently written. CHRISTINA KURLYLO stated that she was not against welfare reform; however, able people on welfare want to work. There should be more funding to programs that promote work rather than cutting assistance. She pointed out that a key component is missing; parents are expected work, but child care is not addressed. She recommended an increase in funding of day care assistance. Section 3 should be rewritten in a way that does not take away the dividend from poverty stricken children and adults. Ms. Kurlylo acknowledged that SB 98 has some positive components such as Sections 17, 25, and 28. However, she expressed concern with the negative effects of SB 98. Section 5 violates the federal and state equal protection clause because low income residents are treated differently. Sections 7-9 raises concerns regarding the affects of these provisions on the children. She stated that Section 11 and 18 seem to indicate that low income people receiving assistance cannot quit a job. Ms. Kurlylo emphasized that children are victims; what message is sent to children when their assistance is reduced and what message is being sent to their parents? Children are Alaska's future, if the children cannot be taken care of today what happens to tomorrow? Number 369 DENNIS MILLHOUSE, testifying from Anchorage, explained that he had come as an employer, educator, and landlord in order to listen to the testimony. Welfare is the worst thing that can be done to any family. He discussed pregnant teens going on the welfare roll; these teens have not contributed to the system. He stated that there should be more welfare fraud investigators. He discussed his experience with his own business in which people turn down work because they lose various forms of assistance; it is a no win situation for these people. Mr. Millhouse indicated the need for continued subsidized day care assistance. There should be some accountability with welfare. SB 98 is a start. He explained that welfare should be temporary situation. DAVID STRONG informed the committee that he is physically disabled and married to a woman with a brain injury. They are raising a disabled step child with learning disabilities. He discussed how the State of Alaska has punished him. How long will the disabled be punished? Although budget cuts are necessary, SB 98 should be thrown away. JENNIFER MASON, testifying from Sitka, informed the committee that welfare has helped her. Welfare does help children, it provides medical benefits, food, and housing for children. She did not understand how benefits could be cut when it is not enough to live on. The rich are subsidized a lot more than the poor. Number 447 DOUG WHITE informed the committee that he works for the University of Alaska. He addressed the notion of people being drawn to Alaska due to its high benefit levels. Alaska is one of the few states that does not have a state sales tax or a state income tax. From those two issues Mr. White concluded that Alaska is not only a draw for welfare recipients, but also a draw to those who do not want to pay their fair share and help others. W. DEERING JONES, testifying from Mat-Su, stated that he was for SB 98. He related his personal experiences with neighbors on welfare. He said that his area was a welfare haven. He emphasized that our own should be taken care of not other people such as immigrants. SB 98 is the first step. Why should I pay for people's benefits when they misuse it? MAUREEN MARKEY expressed disappointment in SB 98 because it seems to be based upon some inaccurate assumptions. She pointed out that one inaccurate assumption is that women impregnate themselves in order to remain on welfare. That further marginalizes a marginalized population, rural Alaskans. She explained that in Southwest Alaska jobs in the villages range from two or three positions at a village store, one or two at the post office and an airline agent. There are also some jobs in the local school, but those positions are usually staffed by people from outside the state. Where are the other jobs that people must take when they are cut from AFDC? Ms. Markey reiterated the question of who would pick up the children when they are cut from funding. SB 98 seems to assume that people randomly become single parents because they can. There are serious reasons why women, young and old, are raising children alone; those reasons should be considered. She informed the committee that Alaska has the highest rate of domestic violence and sexual assault. Alaska also has the fourth highest rate of child abuse in the nation. If a woman gains the courage to leave an abusive and unhealthy family in order to raise and nurture her children alone, she should not be judged and should receive benefits. Number 505 J. P. CREIGHTON, an immigrant from Illinois, related to the testimony of Mr. Jones whom he thought sounded like an immigrant himself. Perhaps, Mr. Jones should read the words inscribed on the Statute of Liberty. SB 98 should be thrown away. He related his experiences with welfare. He informed the committee of his work history in Alaska. He indicated that the notion that people come to Alaska specifically for welfare benefits is not true. Most people come to Alaska to work. Mr. Creighton recommended the development of a state infrastructure which does not require that people be on welfare. BARBARA SUNDAY, testifying from Fairbanks, informed the committee that she was not on welfare or AFDC, but that she does receive child care assistance. She related her experience in which her pregnant daughter would be going on welfare because she is not in a position to help her daughter. Ms. Sunday pointed out that SB 98 would require her daughter to live at home with her. Ms. Sunday lives in an efficiency apartment with two young children. She indicated that SB 98 would push more children underground. The flaws and dead beat people of the system should be addressed. She hoped that SB 98 would be scrapped. The children are our future. LOUISE CHARLES informed the committee that she would be reading the testimony of one of her clients participating in the JOBS program. This client has received AFDC benefits for five years intermittently. She is currently seeking a certificate in office management and technology. In Fort Yukon where she lives there are few jobs available. She discussed her participation in the JOBS program which has helped in becoming self-supporting. She expressed the need to continue funding the JOBS program. Cutting AFDC benefits and the JOBS program will hurt many people like myself. She asked the legislators if they would be willing to help her collect the $10,000 in child support owed to her by the father of her children. If he paid his child support, then she would not have to receive AFDC. She also asked if she would be allowed to hunt and fish in order to feed her children. Number 583 Ms. Charles then read the position of the Alaska Native Coalition on Employment and Training. The Alaska Native Coalition is composed of 13 native entities. Alaska Native Settlement Claims Act (ANSCA) is concerned with welfare reform and will continue to support the government to government relationship between the federal government and the indian tribes. ANSCA supported a three percent tribal set aside and the option to have their own welfare programs. They support the concept of giving the money to the local community. TAPE 95-25, SIDE B Ms. Charles continued with the position of the Alaska Native Coalition. ANSCA supported economic development activities in rural Alaska, especially for those dependent upon welfare assistance programs. ANSCA opposed the limits on assistance, especially in rural communities where there are no jobs. Welfare reform will not work if there are no jobs. Proposed time limits would increase the numbers of homeless and family breakdown while further straining local resources. The proposed time limits would not allow for the completion of education requirements or training goals. The BIA General Assistance program is scheduled for a potential 50 percent cut in funding. If a number of AFDC recipients are cut from the welfare rolls, BIA General Assistance will not necessarily be available as a safety net. Anyone eligible for AFDC or SSI would not be eligible for BIA General Assistance. Number 576 ANSCA is opposed to the denial of AFDC benefits to teen parents based solely on age. Although they support the concept of teen mothers living at home with responsible adults, there are exceptions that should be considered. ANSCA supported child care benefits. They recommended an expanded definition of work in order to include subsistence activities, seasonal employment, and work identified as beneficial to the tribal community. ANSCA supported the AFDC program continuing as an entitlement program. ANSCA supported the focus on incentives versus the implementation of sanctions. ANSCA stated support for the implementation of a welfare task force to be composed of state and tribal members. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if anyone on teleconference who had signed up to testify wanted to testify. No one responded. SHERRI GOLL, Alaska Women's Lobby, stated that she would attempt to put her comments in writing and make that available for the committee since she believed her testimony would require more than the allotted time. She reminded the committee that welfare and public assistance costs are approximately three percent of Alaska's general fund budget. The Alaska Women's Lobby feels that Alaska's nine and a half percent unemployment rate is the reason so many people are receiving public assistance. She acknowledged that Alaska does have the highest assistance level, but other states who seem to have a lower assistance level may have other programs that supplement their basic AFDC level. Alaska places all assistance in the basic AFDC level. The average cost per person in a family receiving welfare is $275 per month. Ms. Goll noted that SB 98 calls for the five year limit to begin unless a person caring for the child is permanently and totally disabled. She indicated the need for a definition of disabled in the legislation. Statistics illustrate that long-term AFDC recipients have increased in Alaska. She pointed out that many of those long-term AFDC recipients are disabled people with children and people who have disabled children. Such parents often have difficulties in finding work, work that would provide adequate medical coverage for the needs of their children and work that would allow flexibility for the care of this child. Another group that faces barriers to employment and who are often on the AFDC rolls are women in violent relationships. There have been some studies that provide surprising results for this group. When these women attempt to get off of welfare through work or training, the battery increase. They are often beaten the night before they are scheduled for an interview or a test which would make the woman unpresentable. Many battered women need AFDC in order to live an independent life and not continue in an abusive relationship. Number 505 In regard to teen parents, Ms. Goll pointed out that the average age of an AFDC mother is 30; there are only 141 teens with regard to this program. The Alaska Women's Lobby urged the committee to eliminate the teen parent project in SB 98. She noted that there is not much cost savings with this program. If there are 141 teens of which half would probably fall under the exclusions in the bill the discussion would be lowered to approximately 70 teens who are living on AFDC outside of their parents home. How many of these teens would be incorporated in this project if it is a demonstration project? She expressed pleasure in the consideration of the Chair regarding the personal responsibility of the boy's parents. Ms. Goll did not think there would be a decline in teen pregnancy if teen parents are required to live at home. Teens seem to place little weight on future consequences. As Senator Ellis pointed out, this change would probably increase abortions more than it would decrease pregnancy. She agreed with the intended message to teenagers that it is not fitting to be pregnant and single. Teenage girls who can be made to value high school and post high school training are going to be less likely to become pregnant than those who do not. She agreed with governmental policies which would immediately place teen parents in a high school completion program in order to provide for self-sufficiency for the family as well as receiving child support from the father. Ms. Goll directed her discussion to the 20 percent reduction in benefit levels as sanctions. She expressed concern with job sanctions. If a woman has good cause for a job change she should not lose that 20 percent of her benefit. She indicated that the Department of Education covered her concerns regarding learnfare. She did not feel that it was appropriate policy to punish children for the behaviors of their parents. Ms. Goll expressed concern with the $200 bonus for children in welfare families who graduate from high school. Although she agreed that there should be encouragement for children living in poverty to get their education, is it fair to give a welfare child $200 when there could be similarly poor families with working parents. In other states that have adopted bridefare, giving an extra benefit to the family, the step-parent becomes financially responsible for the children. That is not the case in Alaska; here the step-parent is not legally responsible for those children. Ms. Goll did not believe that the benefits should be extended to the person who married into the welfare family. If one person can support their spouse then he/she should, but if the children are not one of the spouses then child support from their other parent should be sought. She felt that it would be costly. In regard to the alcohol and drug testing and treatment, Ms. Goll felt that all addicts should have treatment available. She hoped that there would be fiscal notes that would allow that treatment. This provision again punishes the children for the behavior of the parent by taking away the assistance if the person continues to use the prohibited substance. So many of these users that are addicted to illegal and legal substances cannot help that they do not always become cured with the initial treatment. The Alaska Women's Lobby does not like the personal responsibility agreement as written because it seems to only demean people who are already down and out. Perhaps, the agreement could be done in regulations. Ms. Goll expressed the need to reconsider the changes to the interim assistance program; 60 percent of those who are initially determined ineligible become eligible upon appeal. Workfare is a good idea, but in order for it to apply statewide the definition of work should be expanded. As a diversion program, the non-cash program seems good however, in some cases food stamps and Medicaid are not going to be the needed assistance. Therefore, some sort of vendor payment could be utilized. She commented that the two-tier payment system in Wisconsin has only be in existence since July. Number 380 LEONARD FABICH, testifying from Russian Mission, noted that he had already forwarded written testimony. He supported Mr. Wolfe's testimony. He did believe that welfare rolls reflect the lack of jobs in rural areas, but the dependence on welfare creates individuals who do not want to find employment. Frequently people do not take advantage of available positions. Mr. Fabich discussed examples of this in his community. He discussed the abuse of the Food Stamp program. He supported the committee's efforts with welfare reform. CHAIRMAN GREEN announced that she intended to move the bill out of the HESS committee at the Monday meeting.