HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE February 5, 1998 1:45 P.M. TAPE HFC 98 - 19, Side 1 TAPE HFC 98 - 19, Side 2 CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Gene Therriault called the House Finance Committee meeting to order at 1:45 p.m. PRESENT Co-Chair Hanley Representative Kelly Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring Representative Davies Representative Martin Representative Davis Representative Moses Representative Foster Representative Mulder Representative Grussendorf ALSO PRESENT Representative Bunde; Senator Donley; Dean Guaneli, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law; Diane Barrans, Executive Director, Postsecondary Education Commission, Department of Education; Lynne Smith, Staff, Representative Bunde; Wendy Redman, Vice President, Statewide Programs, University of Alaska; Susan Tryk, University of Washington. SUMMARY HB 193 "An Act relating to financial assistance for students attending certain graduate education programs; and providing for an effective date." CSHB 193 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Education. SJR 3 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska limiting the rights of prisoners to those required under the Constitution of the United States. SJR 3 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. HOUSE BILL NO. 193 "An Act relating to financial assistance for students attending certain graduate education programs; and providing for an effective date." REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE spoke in support of the legislation. He observed that the WAMI Medical Education Program is subsidized by the state of Alaska. He noted that not all WAMI students return to Alaska. He emphasized that the State invests approximately $150 thousand dollars in each student. He contended that the State would not run out of doctors without an entirely subsidized program. Representative Bunde maintained that the legislation allows Alaska to reap the just reward of its investment in WAMI students. Students who practice in Alaska for five years would not be impacted. He observed that the majority of physicians live in the state where they did their residency. Representative Bunde provided members with an amendment (copy on file). The amendment would add intent language to clarify that the first year is not included in the repayment requirement. It would also add "or participating" on page 2, line 5. Representative Bunde noted that Alaskan physicians have access to WAMI computer files. He asserted that physicians should be require to pay for this access. Representative Martin stated that the amendment should not be in the form of intent language. He suggested that the language be inserted into statute. LYNNE SMITH, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE clarified that students already in the program would not be affected by the legislation. Representative Davies noted that the effective date should be changed to 1998. Representative Bunde did not think that additional restrictions to assure participation by Alaskan students were needed. He explained that the program already requires students to be Alaskan residents. He stated that residency requirements could be tightened. He acknowledged that 12 of the 40 students that participated in the program, from 1989 to the current year, did not graduate from an Alaskan high school. WENDY REDMAN, VICE PRESIDENT, STATEWIDE PROGRAMS, UNIVERSITY of Alaska stated that the University does not support the implementation of a surcharge. She maintained that a surcharge would negatively affect low-income students. She observed that 8 of the 12 students that graduated from out- of-state high schools were attending prep schools, while their parents lived in state. Ms. Redman spoke in support of the WAMI program. She asserted that the program is an integral part of the University's Health Science program. She observed that the University receives federal research funding as a result of its participation in the WAMI program. She pointed out that the associated residency program has brought over $5 million dollars to Anchorage. She emphasized that there are more applicants than the program can accommodate. She spoke against the amendment. She observed that students have a debt load of approximately $80 thousand dollars without the additional $59 thousand dollar liability proposed by the legislation. She observed that 49 percent of Alaskan students return to the State. The national average is 40 percent. Seventy percent of all WAMI students, who come to Alaska, through rotations and residencies, return to Alaska. She clarified that students would be liable for an additional repayment of $13 thousand dollars if the first year was included in the repayment. Co-Chair Hanley questioned if there is a shortage of doctors in Anchorage. Ms. Redman noted that according to the Washington Journal of Medicine, Anchorage has a 42.75 percent shortage of primary doctors. The statewide shortage is 30.95 percent. Ms. Redman noted that the state of Alaska pays to reserve 10 spots for Alaskan students at the University of Washington. DIANE BARRANS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION COMMISSION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION clarified that the program costs approximately $1.35 million dollars for the second, third and fourth years. Representative Bunde maintained that rural Alaskans would be better served by placing some of the money into a nurse practitioner program. Ms. Barrans pointed out that the current population of doctors in Alaska is aging. The average Alaskan physician is over 40 years of age. Representative Davies emphasized that other students are subsidized by the state of Alaska. Representative Davis noted that the program provides other benefits to the State. He pointed out that there are medivac provisions between WAMI states. Co-Chair Therriault maintained that the state of Alaska would continue to draw students to its residency program. Representative Bunde asserted that the legislation is an attempt to save the WAMI program. He reiterated that the legislation will only impact students that do not return to the State. Co-Chair Hanley felt that the rural areas would benefit more from a nursing program. SUSAN TRYK, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON observed that the University of Washington School of Medicine is partnering with the University of Alaska, Anchorage to develop a physician assistant program, which will be partly in Alaska and partly in the state of Washington. She did not think the program would require additional state funding. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT an amended effective date of 1998. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2# (copy on file). Amendment 2# would require repayment of the first year if the student did not return to practice in the state of Alaska for a minimum of five years. Representative Bunde spoke in support of the amendment. He observed that the amendment would require repayment of an additional $13 thousand dollars if the student did not return for a minimum of five years. He emphasized that physicians earn high salaries. He maintained that the amendment would aid the preservation of WAMI by encouraging students to return to the State. Those that do not return would have an additional liability of approximately $150 dollars a month. Representative Mulder disclosed that he attended a WAMI presentation in Seattle. Representative Mulder spoke in favor of the legislation, but against the amendment. He considered the first year's exclusion from repayment as a scholarship. He observed that the first year's funding goes to the state of Alaska. Ms. Redman clarified that WAMI students carry approximately $80 thousand dollars in debt at graduation, regardless of the legislation. If the legislation were enacted they would have an additional debt of $58 to $74 thousand dollars, depending on the repayment requirements. Representative Davies spoke against the amendment. He observed that, if the legislation were enacted, students would face a potential liability of $120 thousand dollars. The amendment would add another $13 thousand dollars. He feared that students would not want to take the risk. Representative Martin spoke in support of the amendment. He stressed that students can pay off their debt by working in Alaska for five years. He expressed concerns that out-of- state students come to Alaska to enter the WAMI program. (Tape Change, HFC 98 - 19, Side 2) Representative Martin stated that the amendment should clarify in statute that the first year is included in repayment. Ms. Barrans stated that the change to page 2, line 5 would clarify that a student who attended either the University of Alaska or the University of Washington would incur a debt obligation relative to that year. She felt that further clarification of "contracting" was necessary. The intent language was added to clarify that all 4 years would be included. Ms. Redman reiterated that of the 12 participating students, who did not graduate in Alaska, 8 were Alaskan students attending prep schools and 2 were military students. Only two students that did not graduate within the state of Alaska are not accounted for as Alaskan residents. Representative Davies provided members with Amendment 3# (copy on file). Amendment 3# would insert after "interest" on page 2, line 5, "but does not include costs for the first year of the program delivered at the University of Alaska, Anchorage." He observed that the amendment could be modified to state the opposite by deleting the "not" before "does". He clarified that he did not support such an amendment, but offered that it would clarify the intent of Amendment 2#. Co-Chair Hanley WITHDREW Amendment 2#. Representative Davies MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3#. Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to AMEND Amendment 3# to: insert after "interest" on page 2, line 5, "and does include costs for the first year of the program delivered at the University of Alaska, Anchorage." Representative Davies OBJECTED to the Amendment to Amendment 3#. Ms. Redman clarified that the cost of running the medical program at the University of Alaska is $800 thousand dollars. In addition, the first year's out-of-state tuition is returned to the University of Alaska, Anchorage. Co-Chair Hanley summarized that the total cost of the WAMI program is approximately $2.1 million dollars for 40 students. Co-Chair Therriault stated that it costs $48.2 thousand dollars a year per student. Representative Bunde spoke in support of the amendment. He maintained that the payback provision needs to be fairly significant. He compared the salaries of an English teacher and a physician. He asserted that the payback requirement is not excessive. Representative Davies emphasized that, although salaries for some specialties are high, the family or rural practitioner's salary is not high. He stressed that the program focuses on the family practitioner. Representative Davies and Davis disclosed that they also attended WAMI presentations in Seattle. A roll call vote was taken on the motion. IN FAVOR: Davis, Grussendorf, Kelly, Martin, Hanley, Therriault OPPOSED: Mulder, Davies Representatives Foster, Kohring, and Moses were absent from the vote. The MOTION PASSED (6-2). There being NO OBJECTION, the motion to adopt Amendment 3# as amended was passed. Ms. Barrans discussed the fiscal noted by the Department of Education. She estimated that students would be tracked for 23 years. She noted that there would be costs associated with form development and administration. Co-Chair Hanley noted that there would be an increase in general funds of approximately $80 thousand dollars for each student that did not return to practice in Alaska. Representative Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 193 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHB 193 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Education. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 3 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska limiting the rights of prisoners to those required under the Constitution of the United States. SENATOR DAVE DONLEY noted that SJR 3 limits the rights of prisoners, convicted in the state of Alaska, to those required under the Constitution of the United States. He observed that the Alaskan Constitution grants rights and liberties not granted to citizens of other states. He maintained that Alaskan prisoners have utilized some of the provisions of Alaska's Constitution to claim additional rights not available under the federal Constitution. He stated that this could cause significant problems with the administration of correctional facilities. He identified areas of concern: 1. Discipline and classification; 2. Access to rehabilitation programs; 3. Location of incarceration; and 4. Square footage requirement on cell size. Senator Donley noted that the Cleary consent decree prohibits dormitory type cells. He maintained that, without a uniform standard for prison administration, it is difficult to get the Court to clarify the specific requirement. He emphasized that he did not know of any other states where dormitory cells are prohibited. Senator Donley provided members with a Letter of Intent (copy on file). He stressed that the proposed Letter of Intent was based on discussion during previous hearings. Senator Donley observed that the victims' rights provision of the Alaska State Constitution could be viewed as modified by the prisoners' rights section. Senator Donley referred to Brandon v. State, 938 P.2d 1029 (Alaska 1997). He observed that a prisoner who was sent to the state of Arizona contended that his reformation was endangered since he was not close to his family in Alaska. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled that it raised a constitutional question under the Alaska State Constitution. The lower court will examine the case. Senator Donley noted that Chief Justice Rabinowitz, in a dissenting opinion, wrote that the Court had never before extended the principal of reformation to the issue of location. Chief Justice Rabinowitz pointed out, that according to the Brandon decision, prisoner visitation is a component of the constitutional right to rehabilitation. Chief Justice Rabinowitz suggested that, as a result of the decision, the Department of Corrections would find it difficult to justify most out-of-state incarcerations, incarcerations of rural Alaskans in urban facilities and most incarcerations that encompass significant geographical dislocation. He added that there would be significant fiscal implication. Senator Donley referred to Article I, Section 12 of the Alaska State Constitution. He observed that discussion of the principle of reformation held during the Constitutional Convention indicated that an individual right would not be created. Subsequent decisions in the late 1970's by the Alaska Supreme Court concluded an individual right was created. Senator Donley explained that the intent of SJR 3 is to clarify that the Article I, Section 12 does not create individual rights for prisoners. Article I, Section 12 would continue as a guiding principle. Representative Mulder stressed the importance of the legislation on the Department of Corrections' future liabilities and responsibilities. He emphasized that there are not enough inmate programs to assure reformation through visitation. He stressed that inmate programs are expensive. DEAN GUANELI, CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW agreed that the Alaska State Constitutional Convention viewed Article I, Section 12, Principle of Reformation, to be a guideline. He observed that a shift by the Court created a right to rehabilitation in the 1970's. He stated that SJR 3 would clarified that Article I, Section 12 is a guiding right, not an enforceable right. Mr. Guaneli emphasized that the Court has given the Department broad deference in choosing when and what kinds of programs to give prisoners. Despite the Court's decision there has been little impact from litigation. He noted concerns that the resolution would allow funding to be withdrawn from prison programs. He emphasized that prisoner programs are good management tools. Mr. Guaneli referred to the Cleary decision. He did not think that SJR 3 would create a very strong ground for being relieved from the Cleary judgement. He observed that there has never been a finding that the state of Alaska was in violation of the State Constitution. The State has maintained that it did not violate the Constitution. He observed that the state of Alaska has been in contempt of Court for noncompliance with the judgement. He suggested that a pattern of compliance with the order would present a better case for relief. He acknowledged that passage of SJR 3 would not hurt the State's case. Representative Davies noted that state prisoners have maintained that state statutes were violated. He observed that reformation is a management tool. Mr. Guaneli agreed that prisoner programs are good management tools. Co-Chair Therriault emphasized that the Department of Corrections is precluded from withholding participation in prisoner programs as a management tool. Mr. Guaneli reiterated that the Court has given the Department wide deference in deciding how programs are managed. He noted that programs could be withheld during administrative segregation due to prisoner behavior. He added that some prisoners are segregated through no fault of their own. The Department would have an obligation to extend some programs to these prisoners. He maintained that the Court does not impose specifics on the Department. Representative Davies questioned the affect of prisoner programs on recidivism rates. Mr. Guaneli could not comment on the affect of prisoner programs on recidivism rates. Senator Donley emphasized that SJR 3 does not preclude rehabilitation programs. He emphasized that; while prisoner programs are meritorious, how they are implemented should be the policy decision of the Legislature and the Department of Corrections. He maintained that SJR 3 is the best tool available to revisit the Cleary decision. Senator Donley clarified that the Letter of Intent was not considered for adopted by previous committees. He emphasized that the content of the ballot question is the most important consideration. He stressed that the Letter of Intent is a guideline for the ballot question. Senator Donley questioned if the House Finance Committee received the correct version of SJR 3 from the House Judiciary Committee. SJR 3 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m. House Finance Committee 9 2/05/98