House Public Health Committee Part 1
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (19)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
SB328
· 4 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB328”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB550
· 4 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB550”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB814
· 4 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB814”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB213
· 3 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “up, Representative Allen? We're going to run Senate Bill 213.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB759
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB759”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB789
· 3 mentions in transcript
Matched: “Senate Bill 789. Members without objection will”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB791
· 3 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “you're three for three. Senate Bill 791 is the bill to extend the life of the task force on abuse a…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB973
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB973”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB716
· 2 mentions in transcript
Matched: “Thank you. Senate Bill 716 is my bill this time to have a smaller government. The medi…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1983
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1983”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB2171
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB2171”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB7
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…t, then the question before the committee is the passage of House Bill 7, excuse me, Senate Bill 791. All in favor indicate by sayin…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB1940
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB1940”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB244
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB244”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB249
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB249”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB408
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB408”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB833
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB833”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB846
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB846”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB901
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…have a number of people who are here who are interested in Senate Bill 901. And I wanted to make sure that you were aware Senate Bill…”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 5, 2026
This is a quorum. We're going to call the meeting to order. Let me start with a few announcements. I know that we have a number of people who are here who are interested in Senate Bill 901. And I wanted to make sure that you were aware Senate Bill 901 has been amended. There is an amendment that was filed today that would delete the insurance requirements, but that bill will be heard in committee on Thursday. And I appreciate you being here, and I'm sorry you had to come a long way, many of you, for not to be able to hear the bill today.
But I know we had heard from a number of you about the onerous burden of insurance, so we have deleted that requirement. I just wanted you to be aware of that. Members of the committee, we are going to work through lunch today. We will have the Medical Society, who's going to be providing us lunch today. What we'll be doing today, we'll be hearing, first of all, non-controversial bills. We'll hear those about the first 30 minutes.
If you remember, we kind of have some unwritten rules about non-controversial bills. If a couple of hands go up, then it's obviously not non-controversial, and we'll set it aside and run it with the regular calendar. We're going to run House bills today, and we'll work as long as we need to, as long as there are members here to run House bills. So I will let you know that we will most likely reconvene. If we have a recess during the session, we will reconvene.
And assuming we still have items on our agenda, we will reconvene after adjournment this evening. And I'm suggesting that given what our House calendar will be, that we'll be more refreshed if we reconvene about 7.30 this evening. So unless there's objection to that, I would suggest that's what we do. All right, and we'll be running Senate bills on Thursday, and we'll operate the same way on Thursday. We'll stay as long as we need to to get the Senate bills out.
Okay, any questions on that? All right. We're going to do non-controversial bills, and I see Senator Malone there. He is raring to go. He's got a number of bills that he just knows is not going to be controversial. So, Senator Malone, which
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
2:29
bill would you like to take up first? Senator Bill, thank you. Senate Bill 328. Members, while you're looking, I'll go ahead to expedite the thing a little bit. That bill is one that says that hospitals, before a baby leaves the hospital,
that the hospital will prepare something so that they will understand the dangers of shaking a baby. It will be to both parents. That's it in a nutshell.
I appreciate a good vote. Members of committee, I see a motion for Mr. Wardlaw to do pass, but do we have
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
3:06
any questions first? Representative Wagner. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one question. The money for – I noticed in the bill it talked about information, of course, would be disseminated, and the money
to do that and prepare the materials would come from
the budget they already have, or where
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
3:22
would it come from? The hospital association has agreed to this bill. Quite a few states have it where it's sometimes mandatory, sometimes voluntary, but they've basically written this bill, and
it'll come out of their budget. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative
Wardlaw, you're recognized for a motion. Motion do pass. We have a motion do pass on Senate Bill 328. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill?
Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? If not, then the question before the committee is the passage of Senate Bill 328. All in favor
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
4:02
indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Thank you. Senate Bill 759 is an agreed-upon bill between the sponsor, the nursing home industry, and DHS. It makes some changes to how nursing homes are able to, when there's a deficiency written, that they have an opportunity to go before an impartial panel to have their dispute resolved.
Appreciate a good vote. Members of committee, do you have any questions on Senate
Bill 759? what's the pleasure of the committee representative Wilkins are recognized we have a motion do pass for Senate Bill 759 anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill if not then the question before the committee is the passage of Senate Bill 759 all in favor indicate by saying aye
all opposed no Senator Maloney passed your bill
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
5:00
Thank you. Senate Bill 716 is my bill this time to have a smaller government. The medical board will no longer be required to give a quarterly report about their credentialing requirements. Appreciate a good vote. Senator Malone, I do have a
question on that. I assume if we need that information in public health, we can request it at any time? Absolutely. Okay. Any other questions from the committee? What's the pleasure of the committee?
Representative Allen? We have a motion due pass on Senate Bill 716. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? If not, then the question before the committee is the passage of Senate Bill 716. All in favor indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Senator Malone,
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
5:50
you're three for three. Senate Bill 791 is the bill to extend the life of the task force on abuse and neglected children.
Some of you have attended those meetings, and also in that bill, it extends the life of the task force on sickle cell anemia. They weren't able to get theirs in first, so I amended this bill to cover them. Appreciate a good
vote. Committee, do you have any questions? Representative
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
6:20
Wagner. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm sorry, but I do have one question. We passed a bill concerning the sickle cell, and so do we need this task force?
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
6:31
Yes. Yes. Well, the folks that came to me said they did. They wanted to continue their work on doing the research and the
hearings and what else that Arkansas could do to deal with that medical problem, but yes, they want to continue the task force. All right. So that's been since the bill was passed that they have mentioned it? Yes. their bill in after the deadline, and I agreed to put it in my bill. All right. Thank you.
Any other questions, committee? Representative Wilkins? Motion is proper time, ma'am. Looks like it's proper time, Representative Wilkins. We have a motion due pass on Senate Bill 791. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? If not, then the question before the committee is the passage of House Bill 7, excuse me, Senate Bill 791. All in favor indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no.
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
7:35
Thank you. And if those fit your non-contro, I'd ask that whatever you do to get them on the non-contro list, I'd be a request. I may speed up you on the House side. All right, sir. Thank you very much. And the other thing is for the members and your friends, I'm chair of the Senate Public Health Committee, and we'll work, and we're going to get every bill out that the House has, if you'll just let us know. We'll stay as late as it takes to make sure every bill gets out. Thank
you. Senator Malone, it's always a pleasure to have you here. Thank you. We have a few more non-controversial bills, I believe.
Representative Wagner, you're running Senate Bill 814. Senate Bill
814 members, Representative Wagner, you're recognized. Thank you. Committee,
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
8:32
this is a bill from the Medical Society, and SB 814 specifically allows the
Arkansas State Medical Board to collect practice data from their licensees, and practice data would mostly be geographic data, in other words whether they practice in more than one town or more than one county, how many days per week, how many hours per day, and of course this helps them determine where the underserved areas are more accurately, and also it helps to advise new physicians where the need might be.
Thank you. Committee, do you have any questions? If not, what's the pleasure of the committee? We have a motion due passed from Representative Wardlaw. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? If not, then the question is on Senate Bill 814. All in favor indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Representative Wagner, you passed your bill. Thank you. Senator Salmon, you've been sitting here patiently. would you like to present your bill?
Senate Bill 550, members. Senator Salmon, you're
recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, I believe there is a handout going to come around on this bill, so we'll
Senator Mary Anne Salmon
Unverified
10:15
get that out, too. But go ahead and proceed, Senator. Okay. This is simply a bill to require that pets adopted through a pound, a shelter, a humane organization, or animal rescue group be sterilized before the adoption is complete.
It deals with dogs and cats. And I have Billy Grace from the animal shelter in North Little Rock, and he can explain exactly what the bill does. Mr. Grace, if
you will introduce yourself for the record and then proceed My name
Billy Grace
Unverified
10:44
is Billy Grace and thank you for allowing me to speak to you I've been the director of North Little Rock for about 16 years and I have with us, I'm here to support Senate Bill 550 and also here to voice their support today or show their support is Kay Simpson from the Pulaski County Humane Society
Robin Brough from Sherwood Animal Shelter Suzanne Hamilton from Ozark Mountain Basset Rescue Dan Bug from Hot Springs Animal Shelter, Heidi Lemke from Jacksonville Animal Shelter, and Dr. David Bevins, a retired chief of surgery at North Little Rock Memorial Hospital, who's one of our very active volunteers and a champion for this spay-neuter cause. I also have, if you'll real quick, just let me read this list of cities that asked me to voice their support. They couldn't be here today, but the directors from, animal control directors from Pine Bluff, Little Rock Animal Services, Harry Light, president of Central Arkansas Rescue Effort,
Humane Society, Ozarks, Sebastian County Humane Society, Van Buren, Saline County Humane Society, Fayetteville Hot Springs, Maumelle, Benton, Bryant, Springdale, Bentonville, Pine Bluff, Rogers. The list goes on and on. I didn't get a single objection to this. I called around the whole state, and they all indicate that this has to be done. And we're dealing with an animal that reproduces itself from 4 to 12 times over, 2 and 3 times a year. And a year later, all those 4 to 12 had another 4 to 12, and they multiply at such alarming rates, we feel like this is something we just have to bite the bullet and do it.
If you release one animal, if you see a little handout there from an animal shelter, one can – you're basically signed a death warrant on hundreds of animals down the road at some point, and not to mention the undue cost to taxpayers. And we'd certainly – again, we thank you on behalf of everybody here, and we'd be glad to take any
questions. Committee, any questions? Seeing none, what's the pleasure of the committee? Do pass. Was that Representative Lampkin? Mm-hmm. Representative Lampkin makes the motion to do pass.
Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? Senator Salmon, do you want to close for your bill? I'll close for my bill. You'll close for your bill. Then the question before the committee is Senate Bill 550. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Senator Salmon, thank you for being here. Thank you, Madam Chair and Committee. Mr. Grace, thank you very much for the work you do. We appreciate it. Senator Harrelson, I see you're in the room. You want to take your place at the end of the table. We'll be looking, members, at Senate Bill 973.
And I believe you have somebody at the end of the table with you. If you will, just have him introduce himself for the record, and then we'll
Speaker 64
13:20
go ahead and present your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, this bill deals with reciprocity with pharmacists in the state of Arkansas. I have Dr. Mark Riley here with the Arkansas Pharmacists Association. I'd like to turn it over
Speaker 65
13:33
to him to summarize the bill. Madam Chair, thank you, and members of the committee. This bill simply gives the State Board of Pharmacy the authority, says they may impose rules
on states that other states, restrictions on pharmacists in this state, the same way that Arkansas pharmacists are restricted in their state. It's just a level playing
field rule. Thank you. Committee, do you have any
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
13:58
questions? Representative Penartz. So just give me a real-life example. If
I live in Texarkana, I'm a pharmacist, and I want to open a pharmacy in Texas, what happens?
Speaker 65
14:08
Well, that is one case. A better example, if I might, if you lived in Texarkana, Texas, on the Arkansas side
and you had a nursing home that you serviced in Texas that was more than 20 miles away, you would have to pay a pharmacist in Texas to take care of the emergency box, for instance. However, if you lived on the Texas side, you could service the emergency box all the way to El Paso. There would be no restriction at all if you were a Texas pharmacist, but if you're an Arkansas pharmacist, it seems to be a law that's to restrict Arkansas pharmacists from doing business in the state around. And this bill is just about saying, okay, if that's the rule, that will be the rule
for Texas pharmacists in this direction, too. So if
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
14:50
they're not letting us do that, then they're being unfair, sort of an unfair trade practice. Exactly. And it would just
reciprocate that. Okay. Thank you. Members, any other
questions? Seeing none, what's the pleasure of the committee? We have a motion to pass from Representative Penartz. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill?
Senator Harrelson, are you closed for your bill? I'm closed. before the committee is Senate Bill 973. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Senator Harrelson, you passed your bill. Representative Allen, you want to run a couple of bills if you'll take your place at the end of the table. I'm going to take a personal privilege, if you will, while he's doing that, and she's going to shoot me, but I want to introduce my sister who is here observing today, Kathleen Holloway.
She's at the end of the room, so it's a pleasure to have her here today. So she'll shoot me later. She's my little sister, and you know what? That doesn't matter. I can boss her around no matter what. Of course, I know that surprises you all. Representative Allen, you're recognized, and if you will, have your guest introduce himself for the record. Thank you, Madam Chair and member. What bill number are we taking
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
16:17
up, Representative Allen? We're going to run Senate Bill 213.
Senate Bill 213 established the guidelines to regulate coverage in vitro fertilization. That's the whole gist of the bill. Be happy to take any questions.
Committee, any questions from the committee? We'll
do that. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized.
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
17:02
Representative Valentin, it appears as though it's still very similar to what what it was, but perhaps change is one of the organizations that had provided the standards before. Is that correct? MR. That's basically it. MR. And can you explain
a little bit why we would change, why we would
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
17:28
make this change? MR. It was Senator Keesfield, and he's
following the guidelines of American College
of our statutes, OBGYN doctors, and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine for the program of vitro fertilization. To Mayberry, are you ruminating? Tell me what
Speaker 19
17:54
that means, and I'll let you know if I'm
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
18:01
doing it. It doesn't have anything
Speaker 19
18:04
about chewing cunt, I can tell you that.
Representative Penartz. Representative Allen, we're getting real close on it being not non-controversial. So we'll do one more question,
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
18:17
and then we'll make that aside. Representative Allen, why is there the addition of the language, since this is Arkansas, why does it say, or another state health department? I think this
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
18:38
is to cover it outside of the state of Arkansas.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
18:43
Why would that be relevant if the procedures were formed in the state of Arkansas?
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
18:48
I think sometimes people go outside of the state of Arkansas to have procedures done, But yet they fall under the law in the state of Arkansas.
So you're talking about coverage. Is that insurance coverage, Representative Allen? That is
correct. Does that help you, Representative Penartz? No, it does not. Representative Allen, can we set this one aside until we hear Senate bills on Thursday
and hopefully have some more information to committee
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
19:19
members? We sure can, and we'll proceed with
Senate Bill 789. Members without objection will
Speaker 85
19:27
proceed to Senate Bill 789. I'm going to ask Mark Riley with
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
19:31
the Arkansas Pharmacists Association to explain the bill. Mr. Riley, if you will introduce
yourself, please, for the record and then proceed. Yes, ma'am.
Speaker 65
19:41
Mark Riley with the Arkansas Pharmacists Association. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.
This bill is a simple agreed-on bill that prohibits pharmacy benefits manager company from interfering in the conversation of a pharmacist with their patient about anything that relates to their pharmacy benefits or their health
Speaker 74
20:03
care. Give me just a moment, Committee.
I'm sorry, Committee. Questions of Mr. Riley? Representative Penartz. Mr. Riley, I think I understand what
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
20:34
you're trying to do here for pharmacists in the state, and I think it's a good thing, but could you give me an
Speaker 65
20:41
example? Well, an example might be where a patient came in to talk about the medications they could take within their plan design, you know, their plan options if, for instance, one wasn't paid for.
And there are ‑‑ there have been some isolated instances where contracts would say you can't talk to their patient about the plan, and I don't know how pharmacists can do their job. And this is
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
21:04
agreed upon with the PBM community. Okay. So I mean, I'm all for a pharmacist, because I know my pharmacist. I trust her,
and, you know, I often ask her questions, and that is a patient relationship we have. We just wanted to clear this up
Speaker 65
21:17
so we wouldn't be stopping and thinking, well, wait a minute, can I answer that question in my contract or not?
And so they agreed to that. Okay. Motion at the proper time. Committee, any other questions? Representative Penarts are recognized. Motion do pass. We have a motion do pass on Senate Bill 789. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? If not, committee, the question before you is the passage of Senate Bill 789. All in favor indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Thank you, Madam Chair and members.
level, would you mind chairing the committee
while I run a couple
Speaker 117
22:09
of non-controversial bills. Yes, sir. I know you grab them 33.
Speaker 123
22:37
All of the Senate, 244, 249, and 8, 33. 33, yeah.
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
23:00
Welcome, Madam Chair. Identify yourself and tell us which bill you're going to run first. I'm
Representative Linda Tyler, and I'm going to run Senate Bill 833,
and Mr. Breck's here to help me. I'll have him
Robert Breck
Unverified
23:15
introduce himself. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Robert Breck with the Health Department. You're recognized. What this bill will do, it will transfer the lead-based paint program from the Department of Environmental Quality to the Department of Health. We already have a limited program at the department. This will consolidate those two programs. We think it will help with lead-based problems in Arkansas,
and there's no controversy with it that I'm aware of. I'd be more than happy to take any
Speaker 135
23:56
questions you might have. Representative Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. How long
Speaker 136
24:00
has ADEQ had the program? I'm not certain on that. But I'm not certain.
Speaker 138
24:06
How long have you had your program? We've had a program for many years.
Robert Breck
Unverified
24:14
Unfortunately, most of it was defunded around 1999 or 2000, and so our program is somewhat limited now. What the health department has looked at is mainly the health effects of the lead-based paint. does is deals with contractors consultants and inspectors that deal with the abatement of lead-based paint and and is that something you're comfortable
Speaker 135
24:34
you can absorb then absolutely yes thank you other questions from
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
24:42
the committee representative panarch there's not any added
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
24:49
cost for the Department of Health except this transfer is there
Robert Breck
Unverified
24:53
no ma'am the fees that will to be generated, plus grant monies that may become available since the programs are going to be united, will more than fund the program. There's
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
25:03
a lot of language in here that struck and the purpose of that is?
Robert Breck
Unverified
25:10
All of those statutes deal with Title VIII, I believe, which is the DEQ statutes. All those are being transferred to Title XX, which is the public health.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
25:19
Public health? Yes, ma'am. I just want
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
25:24
to make sure I thought that was correct. Any other questions from the committee? Representative Ward-Law. Motion do pass. We have a motion do
pass. Anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the bill? If not, the question for the committee is passage of Senate Bill 833.
All in favor say aye. Opposed? Same
sign. Thank you. Congratulations, Madam Chair. You have passed your
first bill. Thank you, Representative Lovell. If we could take up Senate Bill
244. You recognize? Senate Bill 244 is a code revision bill for Title 11 of the Arkansas Code.
concerning labor and industrial relations. You'll notice that it clarifies the language regarding drug testing, fiscal and medical exams. The rest of it is cleanup language. I would appreciate a good vote. Any
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
26:45
questions from the committee? Representative Hyde. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Madam Chair, who worked
on this bill? I mean, have
the – I guess this would be another
State Chamber labor bill, or has it been worked on together? No, I don't
believe that's the case, Representative Hyde. I believe it's
basically a cleanup bill, and Department of Labor has worked on that with Senator Madison. Do you know, well, you're carrying
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
27:17
it for Senator Madison, so you don't know if the business folks have had a chance to look at this? It's been out there for quite a while,
so I don't know that factually, but I would assume if they have, I would assume they have looked at it and
if they had some concerns, they would have brought them forward, or I'm sure they're here today, too.
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
27:40
Thank you. Thank you. Other questions from the committee? If not, what are the pleasures of the committee? Dr. Gaskell. We've got a motion due passed. Anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the bill? If not, the question for the House, for the committee, excuse me, is passage of Senate Bill 244.
All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed? MS. Congratulations. Pass Senate Bill 244. MS. Representative Lovell,
with the indulgence of the chair, I'd like to do one more, and that's Senate Bill 249. MR.
You're recognized. MS. It's also to make various corrections to Title 20 of the Arkansas Code concerning public health and welfare. Mr. Madison has
worked on this with code revision, making sure that the words are corrected in
terms of the usage and just clean up language. I'd appreciate a
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
28:54
good vote. What's the pleasure of the committee? I had
Speaker 130
29:01
a motion to do pass. Excuse me. I got too fast. Representative Hyde. Thank
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
29:06
you, Mr. Chairman. I'm just really trying to catch up here, and sorry for not having time to have
read this before. I just hadn't really had time to read all these Senate bills since I just came from Senator Madison's committee
where not a single House bill has been run since 9 o'clock this morning, but I'm sure she's going to get to them. I guess in the very first page, line 25, which task force are we talking about? I thought we had taken some action at the beginning of this session to guide away from task forces. Do you know which one this is? Which task force in lieu of a board are we doing here? Representative Hyde, I don't
know that, and I'll get some more information on it. I'll be glad to pull it down and run it on Thursday.
Speaker 166
29:51
Well, okay with me. I'll be glad to help you
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
29:59
do that. Okay, thank you. The chair understands that, and we'll add Senate Bill 249 to run the Senate bills
on Thursday. All right, members, good work.
We've got a lot of non-controversial bills out of the way, so we'll
Speaker 120
30:28
now move to a... Yes, ma'am. That you'd like, may want to run. And Representative Ward, do you have
one? Why don't you take your place at the end of the table, tell us which bill that is, and we'll go ahead and try to do that. And if you want. 2171?
Committee, that amendment is being handed out to you now. What's the pleasure on the amendment? Representative Lee?
Do you have a question? Representative Lee, you're
Speaker 135
31:34
recognized. Rep. Ward, I have a problem with the second page, F. If that weren't in there, I think
I could support it, F. All state agencies shall furnish to the commission and its staff, and that language right there is what the speaker and we agreed upon that we would not tax our staff to help newly created task forces. That the staff was needed to work on committee things. Is there any way you would be comfortable amending F out?
Representative Lee, I don't have any problem. Representative Ward, this obviously needs some discussion. We're going to meet this afternoon and we'll be running house bills this afternoon. So I'll ask that you take this aside and work with Representative Lee on it, and we'll look at it
this afternoon. Okay. I have one other bill. All right,
Mr. Price, let's don't forget, we've handed out this amendment, and we have taken no action on it. Okay? So we'll need to remember that committee. Help us with that. Okay. So what's your bill, a representative
Speaker 179
33:00
word? I have Dr. Nash here to explain the bill. We all know that, you know, it had always been said that America is the melting pot of our world, and by saying so that means that we have a whole lot of different nationality
in America, and this more or less is a cultural diversity bill. We know that from statistics that our state as a whole grew at 9.1 percent, but the Hispanic and the Latino population grew a lot faster. So this particular bill here is more or less to have an interim study to study culture diversity in the state of Arkansas. At this time, I would like Dr. Nash to explain the language in the bill. MS.
Dr. Nash, if you will, introduce yourself for the record, please.
MS. Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Dr.
Chrishell Nash
Unverified
33:47
Chrishell Nash, and I am Medical Director at the Arkansas Minority Health Commission, and thank you for allowing me to join you here today. Very briefly, as Representative Ward has already stated, we all know around this table that there's a growing diversity in the state and the nation, and culture and cultural competency affects all parts of our lives. Now as a health care provider, I can tell you that cultural competency impacts the communication and how I can take care of a patient. There are at least three different cultures when a patient comes into a room.
a medical culture that we all struggle with, there is my culture, and then there is a patient's culture. And we need to understand all of that to provide the best care we can to Arkansans. Research has shown us that cultural competency training can improve the health care system and the public health system. But we don't know right now what's best to do. There are many different studies, there are many different states that have tried this. What this interim study does is say, let's take a look at it here in Arkansas and learn from what other people have done
and see what's best for the diversity that we have in our state and make recommendations as to how we can make sure that we have a culturally competent workforce. Committee, any questions? What's the
pleasure of the committee? Representative Letting makes a motion to do pass. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? If not, all in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Representative Ward, you pass your bill. Thank you, committee.
Representative Penartz, were you able to locate one that you felt would be non-controversial?
All right. Very good. Very good. Thank you very much. All right. Then we'll go to the, without objection, we'll go to the regular calendar then. Representative Linda Collins-Smith has indicated she wants to pass over her bill and leave it on the calendar if we can get to it this afternoon Representative Nichols, are you here to run your bill?
Representative Meeks, I believe you've been patiently waiting House Bill 1983 Representative Meeks, if you'll take your seat at the end of the
Speaker 193
36:15
table I'm here before you to present House Bill 1983, which is the Health Care Freedom of Conscience Act.
And just to give you a summary of what this bill does is it protects medical personnel, medical facilities, and health care – health care payer rights of conscience. It modernizes Arkansas's existing laws by expanding the medical procedures doctors and hospitals may decline to provide from just abortion and contraceptives to the list that you see, such as abortion, assisted suicide, and everything. And what I would like you to consider is that over the last 40 years, there have been many
changes in health care that directly affect life issues. and what this bill does, as I said, is it modernizes Arkansas's current rights of conscience. With these changes and new ideas, we need to ensure that our health care professionals are well protected from being forced to participate in a procedure that would violate their conscience. There have been studies that have been done and polls that have been taken, And it's been said that over 9 out of 10 faith-based physicians agreed that I would rather stop practicing medicine altogether than be forced to violate my conscience.
Catholic hospitals alone account for 1 in 6 hospital admissions nationwide. 20% of faith-based medical students say they are not pursuing a career in obstetrics or gynecology because of perceived discrimination and coercion in that field 88% of American adults surveyed said that it is either very or somewhat important to them that they share a similar set of morals as their doctors, nurses, and other health care providers I believe that this bill is important, as I said in summary
that we bring our current laws up to what's going on in today's world and that we are able to protect doctors. I did talk with the Arkansas Hospital Association and other members who had concerns that this bill was too broad, and we, I believe, addressed those concerns so that there was some protection for the hospital so that a doctor couldn't just, out of the blue, just say, I'm not going to treat that patient and cause hardship on the hospitals.
And so we amended this bill to lessen the broad scope of this bill in order that we could protect both doctors and we could also protect hospitals as well from being put into position to where they would not have the staff to provide medical care. And with that, I'll be
glad to take any questions from the committee. Representative Meeks, I have a question. On page 3, line 32, the medical or nursing school faculty, when I think about their role,
their role is charged with training others on medical procedures. And so you're saying that a faculty person could decide, let's say it's a pharmaceutical faculty. person could decide they're not going to train at all their students about birth control because they have a philosophical or theological objection to that.
Explain to me how that would be handled in maybe a small pharmacy school that we might have in our
state. Well, number one, one of the amendments that
Speaker 196
40:08
we made was that the health care provider has to notify his or her
Speaker 193
40:14
employer in each health care institution. Representative Meeks, we have your amendments are engrossed in the
bill, right? Yes, it should be engrossed in the bill.
All right. So now tell us what line you're talking about.
Speaker 196
40:29
I'm sorry. I do not have – I just got the amendment here. No, it's not
engrossed in your bill then. If you have an amendment in your hand
– It was a member's own amendment. I'm looking at House Bill 1983 that's in gross 328.
Has there been an amendment since then? No,
Speaker 193
40:59
ma'am. I'm sorry. No, I've got the current
Speaker 196
41:04
bill. Yeah, you've got the correct one. I'm sorry. I didn't have the correct one in front of me. I've got one now. Okay,
so you were. I think everybody's settled now. We've got the right bill in front of us. Yes. All right, if you'll proceed, sir, in answering
Speaker 204
41:20
the question. Right. On page four, if you look at line
Speaker 193
41:26
22, or excuse me, starting line 20, it says a health care provider may decline to participate in a health care service that violates his or her conscience
if, and then it gives some specifics, so in the example that you gave, they would not be able to just all of a sudden say, I'm not going to train because of the healthcare. They actually have to notify their employer that they object to whatever so that the employer can take the necessary steps in regards to making sure that there's
Speaker 196
41:59
somebody who can train the students. So if they're the
only faculty member who has the expertise to do that training, then what does a small university do?
Speaker 193
42:12
Well, I guess in that case, you know, they would either have to bring somebody from the outside to do the training or potentially, knowing ahead of time, what they would do is they would have the job requirement out there saying that the person, before they even hire the person, that they have
Speaker 198
42:29
to do these certain abilities. And so they may not even hire the person in the
first place. So you're telling me that in their hiring process, they could not select someone because of their religious beliefs?
Speaker 196
42:42
Not because of their religious beliefs. It would be like if I was applying for a job, there are certain job requirements. And so whenever you are doing interviews, whenever you're doing whatever, then you know what the requirement of the job is. You know what's expected of you to do it, and so that's why we
put those protections in the bill. Thank you, Representative
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
43:11
Meeks. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized. Representative Meeks, going to the example that Representative Tyler had used regarding
birth control, I guess I do see
sterilization on there, but the other items that I see regard human cloning, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, it doesn't appear that general generic birth control would be among those that would be healthcare services that would be excluded. Is that correct? That's one of the things that we
Speaker 193
43:48
of an unlimited deal, we took the scope down to where it only
includes those specific things that are mentioned
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
44:08
in the bill. Any other questions, committee?
Representative Penartz. Good morning, Representative Meeks. I just wondered, so if a person didn't believe in, if a doctor, he or she didn't believe
in artificial insemination for a couple who couldn't have kids, then they could refuse to do
that at their hospital? Yes, ma'am. As long as,
Speaker 193
44:39
again, they have notified the hospital, their employer, in writing that they object because it is against their conscience. And again, what this does is this allows the hospital to find somebody else who can treat
that patient. Thank you, Mr. Meeks. Committee, any other questions? Committee, what's your pleasure? Mayberry. We have a motion due pass on House Bill 1983. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? We have two signed up for the bill. We have two signed up for the bill.
Kathy Archer. Kathy Archer. If you will take your place at the end of the table, introduce
Kathy Archer
Unverified
45:52
yourself with a record, and you may proceed. My name is Kathy Archer, and I am the wife of Dr. Scott Archer, who is in emergency medicine.
The group he belongs to is employed at several different hospitals, and somebody has to work and pay the bills, so he asked me to come here and speak on his behalf,
if that's okay. Ms. Archer, we'll let you keep your comments from your perspective. Certainly you may represent his views, but we're not
going to – if you have written statements from him, we won't be reading those. We'll just keep your statements, please.
Okay. Now, he did give me a letter for me to read. Ma'am, I'm so sorry, but we do not allow that letters to be read
Kathy Archer
Unverified
46:44
in committee. If he wanted to testify, he could come. Okay. He's working. I understand. Okay. I'll just keep it brief then. Like I said, he's an emergency physician, and he is required by the EMTALA laws to see everybody that comes through his ER. He is not, I guess, afforded the luxury maybe of picking and choosing which patients that
he wants to treat. So he feels very strongly about this bill and that it is passed and signed into law because with current medical healthcare information coming down, he wants to make sure that his of conscience is protected. Should he feel that he doesn't want to perform a certain procedure, such as abortion, is
what he referred to, is the only problem that he would have. Of course, if he receives a patient that is suffering from complications resulting from that surgery, he would be more than obligated and he would feel right about treating that patient because she would be in a state of emergency. But he doesn't want to feel like he has to refer a woman for an abortion.
He feels that there's other places that they can go to get that information such as a phone homebook or Internet or word of mouth, but for him to have to refer a client or I'm sorry, a patient for that surgery would go against his conscience and he doesn't want to be made to have to do that. Ma'am,
will you take questions? Sure.
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
48:46
Representative Wilkins, you're recognized. Ma'am, that sounds to me like
it's an employee, employer, just rather than a state law. Couldn't he convey his thoughts to his hospital and they work that out individually? It just sounds like something that's individual to me and that
Kathy Archer
Unverified
49:11
every doctor ought to work out his own. He is, I'm sorry, are you done? Okay. Okay. He is part of a medical board-certified group. So the hospitals, as far as emergency
departments go, they hire the group. Unless you go to a hospital, that just does that on an individual basis. So his group actually
Speaker 213
49:36
is hired by the hospital. Representative Wilkins,
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
49:41
go ahead. But what happens if he just, if that situation arises and he just refuses
Kathy Archer
Unverified
49:49
to do it, what happens? Well, the hospitals that he's employed at, there are other physicians in his group that
he could pull from that would not have a problem with that. the hospital is made aware of, you know, his preferences on, you know, referring women for that. And
Speaker 219
50:11
just the referral alone does not stand as an emergency. So that goes back
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
50:18
to the first question. That can be worked out between
his hospital and the employer and employee without state
Speaker 219
50:28
law. Well, it would be with the group, between the group and
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
50:33
the hospital. But it is. Is
Speaker 219
50:35
it or is it not? Well, he works for several hospitals, and
Kathy Archer
Unverified
50:42
as you know, the health care that's coming down from Washington, that right of conscience part is taken out. And I know I've heard different people say, well, if it's not broke, you know, why fix it? But the fact is that's something that could be broken very easily, and it's much easier
to try and prevent quote-unquote a fire than it is to run around and try and put them out. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative Smith, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
51:18
This is a bill that sounds to me like it's just more big government. Don't you agree? More big government?
Speaker 224
51:26
Sounds like it's just another piece of government we're trying to enact. Is
Kathy Archer
Unverified
51:30
that not right? Well, I guess that's personal opinion.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
51:33
I think the government's already big. I don't think we need to worry about that. I think it is, too. I think it's too big. I think it ought to be
Speaker 50
51:45
the doctor himself, as Representative Wilkins has brought out. That's my position. Don't you agree? Thank you. No, I
really don't agree, but okay. Mrs. Archer, thank you for coming before the committee. We appreciate it. We have one more signed up. Do we have anybody who wants to speak against the bill? Thank you. We have one more signed up to speak for the bill. Ms. Marianne Lenane, am I pronouncing that correctly?
Thank you, ma'am. If you will, take your place
Marianne Lenane
Unverified
52:18
at the end of the table and introduce yourself for the record. My name is Marianne Lenane. I'm a registered nurse in the state of Arkansas. I'm also the executive director of the National Association of Pro-Life Nurses and currently a resident of Jesseville, Arkansas. I'm here to testify in favor of H.B. 1983, legislation which would ensure that the health care and other professionals can refuse to participate in work-related activities which
are objectionable to them on religious or moral grounds without fear of reprisal. Our organization founded to unite and support pro-life nurses. It is now 33 years old. In the beginning, our greatest need was to defend nurses who were being asked to participate in abortion. But as Representative Meeks has said, that list of procedures and treatments that can be done that are objectionable to people in the medical profession has grown exponentially in the last 30, 40 years.
And as abortion becomes increasingly unfavorable and marginalized and is being done mostly in freestanding clinics, we've had to expand the interest of pro-life people or people who have moral objections to some of these things. There are many practices now invading the medical profession which are equally offensive because of moral or religious conviction that life begins in conception and is to be respected until natural death. These offensive practices are not restricted to any one area or type of nursing. They pervade every aspect of profession that we are trained to practice.
The list of ethical dilemmas continues to grow, and these appear to be very well covered in HB 1983. It is probable that a nurse would be involved in any one of these activities, but we are indeed pleased to see that this bill includes a number of other professionals who might be called to participate in activities which they find objectionable to their conscience. The organization recognized as the official spokesperson for American Nurses, the American Nurses Association, has recognized the importance of the right of a nurse not to participate in morally unconscionable acts.
I quote from the ANA Code of Ethics, where nurses are placed in situations of compromise that exceed acceptable moral limits or involve violations of the moral standards of the profession, whether in direct patient care or in any other forms of nursing practice, they may express their conscientious objection or participation. patient. Where a particular treatment, intervention, activity, or practice is morally objectable to the nurse, whether intrinsically so or because it is inappropriate for the specific
patient, or where it may jeopardize both patient and nursing practice, the nurse is justified in refusing to participate on moral grounds. I continue. Threats to a nurse's integrity may also be expectation that the nurse will act in a way that is inconsistent with the values or ethics of the profession. Nurses have a duty to remain consistent with both their personal and professional values and to accept compromise only to the degree that it remains an integrity preserving compromise. The provisions covered in HB 1983 would protect the nurse from being
forced to choose between our moral sensitivities and our livelihood. Nursing has always been and always will be because of its service nature comprised primarily of individuals of autistic motivation who will rise to the defense of the vulnerable and the defenseless. Those on the receiving end of these services should want it no other way. And as recent polling of nurses by a prominent nursing journal reveals, nurses are overwhelmingly pro-life and would indeed find themselves in compromising situations if these protections are not implemented.
As the current nursing shortage continues to grow with no end in sight, it would be unwise to drive out any nurse who would feel forced to give up his or her profession rather than to compromise conscience on any of these issues. This speaks also to physicians, as Representative Meeks said, about physicians not wanting to go into OB-GYN practice because of the moral issues involved. These nurses and other professionals covered in this bill must know that they will be protected from having to participate in these objectionable practices. The general
public should also be assured that those who respect the sanctity of life and the dignity of the individual will not be excluded from those who care for them. Our federal government has a long-standing commitment to respect the rights of conscience of all citizens, extending to health care institutions and religious employers, and this began right after Roe v. Wade in 1973 with the Church Amendment. Since then, several measures have been adopted to protect these conscience rights. These rights are now in serious jeopardy as the list of offenses to moral sensitivities, it grows.
And now we turn to our state houses to help us to protect these. In addition to my role as the National Association of Pro-Life Nurses, I am also the Respect Life Director for the Diocese of Little Rock, which encompasses the entire state of Arkansas. The Catholic Church has long championed for the rights of its members to act according to their consciences formed by the teachings of the Catholic Church. The church has added its voice to the voices of numerous other organizations in defense of conscience rights. Political commentator Paul Chapman pointed out in an article which appeared in April 2005 edition of the Chicago Tribune
that abortion rights advocates cherish the rights of choice, but not all choices are created equal. People who uphold women's right to make her own reproductive decisions want to deny others the right not to take part in these decisions. The demand for freedom has been turned into a pretext for compulsion. His article was written in response to a then-current controversy on pharmacists' right of refusal to dispense drugs that they believe to be morally unethical to use. It concluded with a proposal for a compromise which is a small price to pay
for protecting the rights of freedom of everyone. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches on conscience that deep within his conscience, man discovers a law which is not laid upon himself, but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. For a man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. His conscience is man's most secret core in his sanctuary. There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths.
On behalf of the nurses and the other professionals of Arkansas and the members of the Catholic Church, I urge you to vote in favor of H.B. 1983. Thank you for your consideration. Ma'am, thank you
very much for your testimony. We appreciate it. Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak
against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? Committee, what's your pleasure? We have a motion due pat- Mr. Mayberry, Mr. Mayberry, yes.
I'm sorry, Representative King, Representative Mayberry has preempted you. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized. Motion do pass. We have a motion do pass from Representative Mayberry. Thank you. For House Bill 1983, the question before the committee is the passage of House Bill 1983. All
in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. No. Representative Meeks, you failed your bill. I see two hands, so we will have a roll call.
Mr. Price, if you will, prepare the roll call. Just a reminder to the members and the folks in the audience, what we do is we call each
Speaker 232
59:58
name, and we do that in seniority order. Representative Allen. Representative Allen. Representative Gaskell. Yes. Representative Lovell, Representative King, Representative Hall, Representative Hyde, Representative
Representative Penartz? Representative Wagner? Representative Wagner? Representative Word? Representative Lee? Representative Smith? Representative Wilkins? Rep. Perry, Rep. Malone, Rep. Ledding, Rep. Wardlaw, Rep. Lampkin, Rep. Lampkin, Rep. Mayberry,
Vice Chairman Woods Chairman Tyler On a vote of 8 to 4, Representative Meeks, you failed your bill
Representative Allen, are you here to run your bill? Representative Hubbard, are you here
to run your bill? Representative Nichols? Representative Powers?
Representative Powers Bill is going to interim study. Representative Murdoch. Representative Nichols. I'm leaving out anybody. Speak up.
Representative Wood, are there any House members here who wish to run bills today?
Representative Wood, you're recognized to run a Senate bill for Senator Dismayne.
Senate Bill 847-846, thank you. Senate Bill 846.
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:03:55
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, committee members. Senate Bill 846 was brought to me by Senator Dismang and Senator Laverty, and we did an amendment which has already been engrossed, and I think that was the right thing to do. I didn't want to spring an amendment on the committee. I wanted everybody to have time to look at it, and I have Dusty here that would like to help explain the bill with Madam Chair's permission.
If you will, go ahead and introduce
Dusty Maxwell
Unverified
1:04:29
yourself for the record, please. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Speaker 244
1:04:32
My name is Dusty Maxwell. I am with Pathfinders Incorporated in Jacksonville, and I'm here today representing the Developmental Disabilities Providers Association. Many of you may be aware there's been a personal care bill that was passed previously this session that was dealing with assisted living programs and residential care programs. And those are mainly geared for individuals with mental illness.
For some reason, the developmentally disabled was left out of that. This is a parity bill that allows programs serving the developmentally disabled to provide a multi-rate personal care system. Many times we have, not many times, but frequently we have openings in our apartments in our group homes, and if there's not someone available in our area on waiver, we could
take somebody off of the waiver list and provide services in one of our residential programs at the lowest cost possible. It would be only personal care and what they pay for rent. And this is just an equity situation for the developmentally disabled. I'd be happy to answer any questions. MS. Mr. Maxwell, I
have a couple of questions. In terms of the impact this will have on our budget in the state, will you speak to that,
Speaker 247
1:06:01
please? MR. Yes, ma'am. We put a caveat in here that we would only implement this based on availability of funds.
MS. And where might those funds be available? Help me understand the budget and just
Speaker 244
1:06:20
how those funds become available. The previous session, this body passed a provider fee bill for intermediate care facilities, and there are funds that are dedicated in that to programs for the developmental disabled.
This probably won't cost more than $100,000 to $200,000, and there should be more than enough money in that existing program to pay for this. Members, do you have
any questions? I see a few furrowed brows. Representative Penartz, I could
just see that on your face. I knew you
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:07:03
were coming. Well, I'm a member of joint budget, and so I want to make sure that because we've
We've got the RSA sitting on our desk
right now, and I don't remember any discussion in the RSA discussions we had in committee that
included this, but you're saying there, Mr. Selig, or through the department or division, through the director there, that this money is taken out of expansion dollars or explain that to me because what we there's no money
Speaker 244
1:07:45
in the RSA for this. I believe the way that it works is that when we passed the legislation for the provider fee that the money was placed in a special account in the trust fund where it could only be utilized for DD programs through DDS. And I believe that there is some money. There's also some funds that were available prior to CMS passing blessing, if you will, our
provider fee. So there is money available. But in case that there's not, in case they need it for other things, that's why we put in
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:08:28
there that it's based on availability
of funds. I'm for what you're trying to do here, Representative Woods, and I appreciate the information that you've given us about this. So the Medicaid Trust Fund has a sub-account that has money paid out or paid for this that can be drawn upon for these particular types of services.
I know you said there's some money, but Russ, do you happen to know how much is in that sort
Speaker 247
1:09:00
of sub area I believe currently there's ten million dollars in that
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:09:04
account and is that money in that account used for anything else
Speaker 244
1:09:13
assist with the the intermediate care facilities right but also that hit more there's more money than what it would take for the right I think you satisfied
my question madam chair committee any other questions Representative Hyde, you're
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
1:09:30
recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. I listened to all that, and I still didn't get it
straight. Is there an appropriation to spend this money? I understand what you're saying is the money is there, and if available, if there's excess money that can be used, but do you have an appropriation
Speaker 247
1:09:46
to spend this money? There's already an appropriation that will be for
Speaker 244
1:09:52
personal care. The individuals that I'm talking about would be eligible to receive that service if they
if they were in a residential care facility already. So the money is there to pay for that in the budget. So
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
1:10:04
there's an appropriation for? Personal care. And it's under personal care? Yes, sir. It's under
Speaker 244
1:10:09
the Medicaid budget. This would allow DDS to attribute some of their funds that's dedicated to them to go to that that's already in there. Okay, so. The department has the ability to move funds around, as you well know. Well, if they have that
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
1:10:26
ability, what do we need this bill for?
Speaker 244
1:10:30
Because we are not allowed to bill at the multi-hour rate. This changes where our rules match what it is for the Middly Hill. Okay, so it's really a billing
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
1:10:45
issue. Correct. Is that billing statutory, or is that rules and regs? You
Speaker 247
1:10:52
passed a bill several sessions ago to allow this to happen in residential care facilities.
Speaker 244
1:11:02
We were left out of that bill, and this is to authorize the department to pay a multi-hour rate. And this is just, again, an equity situation. We want to be able to do the same thing. Let me give you, if you will, I'll give you an example. So this is a prior-approved situation for personal care. There's only 62 hours a month that you can bill for anyway. Currently, if somebody comes into one of our group settings, a group home, apartment setting, whatever,
we can only bill in 15-minute increments, and it's very paperwork involved. If you were sitting with four people feeding lunch, you would have to say, I spent from 11 to 11.15 feeding John, 11.15 to 11.30 feeling Mary. This would allow you to bill for the hour for those four people. Again, it's a paperwork situation, but it's so labor-intensive, it's just really difficult for us to do that.
Now, if these individuals went to a residential care facility of which they were eligible to receive that service, they can bill at a multi-hour rate already, and it did take legislation and the threat of a
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
1:12:28
lawsuit. Okay. Well, I think now I'm really
confused. Thank you. Anyone here from DDS who might give us a little better sense of what didn't look like it?
All right. Committee, you have any other questions
Speaker 247
1:12:45
then? I would just say that they did not have, once we put in a base on availability
of funds, the department was okay with this. Okay. Any other questions,
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:13:01
Committee? Representative Woods, did you have something you wanted to offer? Yeah, I think there's been a lot of information. It's a lot to digest all at once, but basically what you're trying to do is allow somebody with
developmental disabilities the same billing rate, multi-hour billing rate, as someone with a mental illness.
That's what the bill does. Thank you very much. Committee, what's your pleasure? Representative Hyde makes the motion do
pass. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? And the question before the committee is the passage of Senate Bill 846. All in favor indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Representative Woods, you
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:13:41
passed your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, committee
members. Thank you. You're welcome. I saw that Representative Nichols has come in the room.
Representative Nichols, what bill will you be presenting? 1940, I believe. House
Speaker 261
1:14:03
Bill 1940. And I have an amendment with that. Give us
a few minutes to get that amendment handed out.
Unknown speaker
1:14:28
Can you give me a copy of the bill, too?
Committee, let's go ahead and handle the amendment while it's being
passed out. Representative Penards, you're recognized. We have a motion to do pass on the amendment. All in favor
indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Representative Nichols, you're recognized to
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:15:18
present your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would consider this a simple bill in that right now projects over $5 million in There's a process there where certain of those projects do not have to go to open competitive
bidding. My original bill raised that $5 million to $20 million. My amendment lowers it down to $10 million. So anything under $10 million has to be by open competitive bidding. This is to open up the process where we have just that, just a process that is open. that the lowest bidder, lowest responsible bidder gets the job instead of situations where things other than the bid are considered.
So in that sense, I think it's a very simple bill, an attempt to open up the construction business to those contractors that feel like they've been shut out. Representative Smith,
you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
1:16:26
Mr. Nichols, can you give me, for instance, why we would need a bill like this? I need
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:16:33
some help on that. MR. Well, I think
that there's a feeling out there about some of the contractors and some of the folks that work with contractors that they are unfairly shut out of public work,
that if the decision is based on factors other than MR. Because of
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
1:16:51
their ability to perform or because of
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:16:55
the money amount? MR. Well, the way the original bill is written, anything over $5 million can go straight to a construction manager type of project where a lot of subcontractors then are chosen by a construction manager, and it may not be based upon the bid that they provide.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
1:17:20
I don't see why I really need it, but I guess that's my
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:17:25
own error. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Well, I think the need is open, transparent bidding processes, and I don't know exactly the time the $5 million was established, but we've had had increase in cost in construction, and so there's been some creep there, and so some of the what would have been smaller jobs are not.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
1:17:48
So you've had some instances that you know of record
to where people have felt they were shut out. Is that what you're driving at? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you,
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:18:11
Madam Chair. Representative Wilkins. Representative Nichols, wouldn't you agree that all contractors are not created equal? By our creator, yes.
Speaker 276
1:18:19
I've, you know, we've had some rather
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:18:23
large buildings built in Jonesboro and chose the lowest bidder. And a lot of times if you have a reputation out there, that's not necessarily the way to go. I know the nature center that was built in Jonesboro a few years ago, they made a mistake, I think, in contracting the bill by going to the lowest bidder. and knowing that other bidders had better histories and they didn't really get a good building
and they're still working on the building. So sometimes...
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:18:54
I know there's going to be some anecdotal instances where going with a low bidder, it didn't work out the way that the owner, this being the state, wanted it to. But as publicly funded projects, they're required to have a payment and performance
bond. And so that's going to cover those situations. But what we
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:19:16
have now, as far as quality in most places, seems to be working pretty well.
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:19:22
Would you not agree? No, I do not, because I think if we are arbitrarily excluding some folks from being able to have their bits considered, I don't think that's a fair system. Like our Arkansas Constitution says that, you know, things should go to the lowest responsible bidder if it's built in a county. Now, the problem is, in my view, the Arkansas Supreme Court said that little C County meant capital C County, and it only applies to county government.
But I think the intent of our Arkansas Constitution is to keep the special deals out of it and be open and have it out there where everybody can see who's making the bids. And it's the lowest responsible bidder. If somebody has a history of, like you said, not doing right on the job, I think they could be excluded. But let's make it based upon their work performance, and let's make the award in the contract based upon the low bid and the work performance.
Thank you, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair. Committee, any other questions? What's your
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:20:50
pleasure? I think there's some people signed up to speak against it. Yes,
sir. but the way we work is we do the motion first and then we do speak for and against and I for lack of a motion sir I believe you have failed your bill okay thank you madam chair all right any other house members here
to run a bill this morning we are going to reconvene this afternoon
we do have I know some folks had to run some bills this morning But if we don't get them done this afternoon, I'm doubtful that House bills are going
to get out. Yes, sir. Representative Hyde. Thank you, Madam
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
1:21:30
Chairman. I'm wondering, as we meet in the morning and in the afternoon and stuff, normally after three passes, they go to deferred. Are we still counting that? And each meeting is counting, and so everything,
because it looks like some of these maybe have been here a little while,
Speaker 279
1:21:46
but I might be wrong. I'm just asking. I'm trying to see if we're making
progress. I believe we are making progress, and yes, sir, we are doing that. We pass over them twice on the
Speaker 279
1:21:57
third time. We put them to the deferred list. Okay. As
I understand it, the sponsor can also request to stay on the active, and I think there's been a
Speaker 165
1:22:06
few of them that have done that. Okay. Thank you. All
right. Thank you for your progress, Madam Chair. Yes, sir. Representative Penartz.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:22:13
Representative Penartz. In that mode, because we're trying to clean our calendar, and I know you're pushing us, with our permission, and we agree with that because we want to deal with all the bills that are on our calendar. But would it be appropriate if we had some call-outs this morning, if our staff person could contact those legislators and say, your bill was called this morning, we had time, we're going to have a meeting this afternoon?
Speaker 282
1:22:44
Yes, ma'am. Would that be appropriate? Yes, ma'am,
it would be. We'll do that. Ladies and gentlemen, we did order lunch. I expected there to be a few other people here to run bills based upon information I had been given. So there is lunch over here in the corner for you. It is provided by the Medical Society. You're welcome to pick it up and to eat lunch at your leisure, unless there's no other business to come before the committee. Representative
Pinnartz. with the permission of the committee
Representative Pernards wants to run Senate Bill 408. Yes ma'am
please go ahead. I'm being a little bit facetious Senate Bill
408 did you say Representative Pernards Madam Chair.
Representative Penarcher, recognized. Present your bill.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:24:05
Thank you, Madam Chair, fellow colleagues. This bill is
Senator Malone's bill. It's an act to ensure that when you go into a restaurant that there's some type of notice of undercooked hamburger meat. It's basically that the restaurant that
sells hamburger meat that has not been heated to at least 150 degrees for at least 15 seconds, shall place on the restaurant's menu a statement
that the, from the Department of Health that indicates that it has not been heated to 150 for at least 15 seconds. So basically what has happened, Senator Malone had a grandson who got HUS. Now some of you may know what that is. It's a kinship to E. coli. And forgive me if there are medical people in the audience, I think what that, if I can remember the medical name, it's uremic, hemelotic uremic syndrome. And it's a very serious illness. It attacks
your vital organs. And his grandson almost died of this. And I was talking to someone the other night, a fellow representative said that she had a cousin who got it and it attacked her brain cells, and now she can't quite walk straight. So it's a very serious illness that you can get from eating hamburger meat that's not cooked correctly. So I would just offer that. It's a very simple bill in that sense. So I'd be glad to try to respond to
any questions that my colleagues might have.
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
1:25:58
Representative Mayberry, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Penartz, I certainly understand the point of the bill and don't
disagree with it. However, in reading the exact language of what it says, on lines 28 through 33, it says that this is in reference to a restaurant that sells hamburger meat that has not been heated to 155 degrees, and that they have to have a statement, and what it says that
the statement says is that the Department of Health does not authorize the restaurant to serve hamburger meat that's not been cooked to 155. But it doesn't say anything about them stating in that statement that they are selling meat that's not 155. What happens is you
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:26:41
go in, this is the practical, and that's a good question representing may vary. What happens is people go into a restaurant and they say they want their hamburger well cooked or they want it rare. Well, a lot of times when you order a rare hamburger,
it's not cooked appropriately. And I would never order a rare hamburger myself. But there are people who do, and it's just not a good practice to be engaged in. So this simply calls for a notice to be placed on their menus about uncooked meat or uncooked hamburger meat. It certainly is protective of those who, actually it protects the restaurant from liability is what it does, while giving notice to the customer that really that's not something
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
1:27:35
you want to engage in. Like I said, I mean, I understand the point of what it's trying to accomplish. It just seems that the actual language itself, it doesn't require in the statement. This only applies to restaurants that sell hamburger that's rare. That's correct. But it doesn't say that that has to be indicated in the statement. It just says that the Department of Health does not authorize the restaurant to serve hamburger meat. I guess what I'm saying is that as a consumer, if I just read one line that says that the
Department of Health doesn't authorize meat under 155 degrees, in my mind, then I think, okay, well, then this restaurant is meeting those guidelines when, in fact, this is only applying to restaurants that do not meet those guidelines. I
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:28:27
understand what you're talking about. Okay. One of the things the Department of Health said in this, too, is that, you know, there's even though they have inspections going on and they try to cover all these restaurants,
they really are acting on a complaint basis most of the time. If they have someone who goes to a restaurant, says that they ordered a medium hamburger or whatever, medium cooked, and actually got one that wasn't and tried to eat around the edges. But it does call for that. This calls for that statement to be put on the menu or in the menu in some fashion, whether it's in small print or whatever.
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
1:29:18
Representative Wagner, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Most of my questions have been answered, but what you're telling us is that even with the statement on their menu, the restaurant, if the person asks for a rare or medium rare hamburger, they would go ahead and prepare it, but this gives them a little cover
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:29:44
for that? Now, especially in some of these, you know, a lot of these restaurants are not change restaurants they're small small business owners and it certainly gives the consumer that notice
and yet again it helps retain the business owner in that instance still things that it's a bit unnecessary do you think well I'm running
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
1:30:02
this bill for Senator Malone so absolutely Maybe he thinks it's necessary. Representative Lovell, do
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:30:06
you have a question? I have a motion. Oh, you have a motion. And what is your motion? Let me
hear it. Immediate consideration. We have a motion for immediate consideration. That's a proper motion.
All in favor of immediate consideration indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Then the question before the committee is the passage of Senate Bill 408. your pleasure wait a minute can i could i have done an immediate consideration without a motion madam i don't think there was a motion on the floor yes sir yes yes ma'am thank
you very much i apologize that representative level i i withdraw my motion i followed you down the thorny path
representative allen we have a motion do pass move immediate consideration and representative Representative Lovell now has moved to immediate consideration. All in favor indicate by
saying aye. All opposed, no. The question before the committee is the passage of Senate Bill 408. All in favor say aye. Aye. All
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
1:31:23
opposed, no. No. Representative Penartz, you failed your bill. Well, I'll relay that decision to Senator
Malone, and he can take further action if
he wishes. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, colleagues. Representative Letting, we are going to come back this
afternoon. We have a cranky
Speaker 19
1:31:47
committee. I'm not sure that I would recommend you try to. So it is your... All right, so if there's no other
business before this committee, we stand adjourned.
Agenda
Call to Order
SB328
SB759
SB791
SB814
SB550
SB973
SB213
SB833
SB244
SB249
HB2171
HB1983
SB846
SB1940
SB408
Adjournment
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative Linda S. Tyler Chair
Unverified
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
Senator Mary Anne Salmon
Unverified
Billy Grace
Unverified
Speaker 64
Speaker 65
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 19
Speaker 85
Speaker 74
Speaker 117
Speaker 123
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
Robert Breck
Unverified
Speaker 135
Speaker 136
Speaker 138
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
Speaker 130
Speaker 166
Speaker 120
Speaker 182
Speaker 179
Chrishell Nash
Unverified
Speaker 193
Speaker 196
Speaker 204
Speaker 198
Kathy Archer
Unverified
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
Speaker 213
Speaker 219
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
Speaker 224
Speaker 50
Marianne Lenane
Unverified
Speaker 232
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
Dusty Maxwell
Unverified
Speaker 244
Speaker 247
Speaker 261
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
Speaker 276
Speaker 279
Speaker 165
Speaker 282