Representative Carol Dalby

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (57:04)

us to get our heads around it.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (56:32)

Because this is new, and you're asking us to be first in something that's not tried out. We don't know how it's really going to affect us or hold us to it. And it just seems like that we're at a good point to be able to do that. And that's my request. I would like to see it go in, not to die. I have interim studies come through my committees all the time that we had very significant legislation come out of it this time around. And it just seems like to me that it would be a great way for

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (56:06)

by this, but I would ask the representative, would he consider putting this in interim study so that we could have a detailed look as to how something like this is going to look and what all it's going to involve and potential costs? Because I think at this point, I can't get on board until I know those things. And so I'm just wondering, Would an interim study really be the best way to handle this?

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (37:09)

No, you can speak as much as you want. No, I don't think you want me to, because then I'll start going line by line and, you know, the old saying, slowly we turn. How much is this going to cost? We're talking about millions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of dollars. We don't know. And so you're asking us, if I'm correct, Representative, for us to enter into a compact with an unknown cost to be a member of the compact because this is a relatively new concept, correct?

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (37:03)

Sure. And one more quick question, and I'll get out of the queue and be quiet.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (36:34)

But maybe I'm reading that too much. Thank you. Thank you,

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (36:16)

anything. Oh, I understand that, and I appreciate that. But, once again, there's language in there that says we shall pay this and we shall do that. And I am worried and would like the representative to explain to me it appears that this is an end around the PSC.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (35:24)

and there's the shall language in there. So it just seems like to me that we need to step back and look at this a little more carefully before we get ourselves into something that we might not be able to opt out on some of those things. But it's just my thoughts. Thank you. If you'd

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (35:04)

and I understand that. And can you give me some of your other examples? Yeah, I mean, you know, to me, shall

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (35:10)

is shall. Sure. And so, you know, I'm concerned. You get a big state like Texas, and they've got, you know, something that they want to build out, and all of a sudden we're stuck with a big part of it, you know,

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (33:38)

I don't think I really am against the concept, but I think the way it's written right now, it's a little too draconian for me to go with, but could you address those? I know I rambled around, but I had at least four paragraphs that I found very troubling that I cannot support at this time. Thank you. I

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (33:08)

And then you talk at the very first, and I know I'm saying a lot more than just one question at a time, but there's some troubling language in here to me that you get up there and on the cost sharing. So I don't know. There are five states in it, and three of them vote that we're going to pay this, and we're going to pay it. And we can't opt out of it. And so, I mean, I understand what you're trying to do.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (32:32)

Yes, ma'am. Existing transmission infrastructure that has previously been permitted by states, shall not be required to be any new permits, but it's, let's see, States participating shall take action to remove permitting barriers or applicable state agencies and regional bodies. Shall, to me, says we have to. It's not a may. It's not an opting out. And so there's a little more to this compact in my reading of it that it appears that, you know, we're going down that path.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (31:55)

the states adopting the compact shall allow and streamline permitting and regulatory review. And so that's not being opted out in that last paragraph because that's Article 5. So the last paragraph is Article 4. And then my other question, just quickly looking at this, because I'm not seeing it as a panacea that you're telling us that it is, But on page 8, articles, well, page 8, which would be paragraph 7, I'm not sure, I guess it's article 5 again.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (31:21)

She's looking at page seven. Hang on, I'll tell you. Page 7, number 5, it says the council, I think it's number 5, yeah, thank you, I couldn't find the lines on there, you know, there's some, during, all through that section, I was quickly reading it, and it talks about what the states will do, the states shall,

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (30:50)

But if you move over to page 7, and it's Article 5, there's a mandatory clause. It says states shall allow and shall streamline regulatory review. And so there's some shalls in there that we're not, there's no opt-out on it when you look at that. And then when you look at, hang on.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (30:34)

Representative Dalby, I recognize for your question. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate your comments, Representative, but I'm reading this a little bit different maybe than what you are. That last paragraph that you referenced that we could reject anything, that's in Article 4.

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (1:46:42)

session. Well, I appreciate that comment, but once again, I know what's going to happen in my town. And all of that's going to go to another state. So, thank

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (1:45:21)

It's going to have real specific consequences for my area, and, you know, so I guess my question is, you know, What am I going to tell my constituents who used that particular pharmacy all these years? Well, go over to another state and use them there. We don't, you know, are that. But that's what's going to happen. So my question is, how do I answer my constituents that are going to lose a pharmacy in my town?

Insurance & Commerce (House) — April 2, 2025 (1:44:46)

And I'm not pro-PBMs, but what's going to happen in my town is I'm going to lose one of my three pharmacies, and then that's going to be it. And so I only have three pharmacies. I don't have any independents. I'm going to lose that. That business is going to go across the state line. We're going to lose the tax dollars, and so, you know, just say, oh, it's only, you know, only 35 or only going to do that.