Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee- House

There. All right members so we're gonna go from the top of the agenda down except bills that have been heard once will be at the bottom of the agenda other than that we'll try to go down the agenda as is written. So at the start out with the first thing we have we have a number of concur. In in Senate amendments the first one is HB ten sixty three. Representative Dotson. And members we have for amendments would like to deal with all for those at the same time. Those been passed out. Bill. They handle for those. Okay you have all four of the amendments on your desk there. Representive you're recognized to present your amendments. Thank you Mr chair members the committee if you'll remember this is the telemedicine bill we heard the first couple amendments or start discuss first couple minutes a few weeks ago due to a few concerns and some changes that were requested as well as an emergency clause that didn't get adopted in the Senate the Senate recalled this bill and made a few more changes to try to appease some other concerns I think we've got What is. I'll a lot better bill now before you to to consider And so I will. Kind of briefly go through if if I guess do we need to make a motion the batch these for concurrence is. Yes seven motion wide move would batch a mall and then all acts I'll go through them all okay. The committee The motion is to batch all for amendments one vote for the for amendments. All in favor signify by saying aye All opposed nay. Motion carries you're recognized thank you Mr amendment number one basically all that's left of that besides I think the title change is the emergency clause so Just to explain that Amendment number two to changes co sponsors Amendment number three is really the meat of the bill and and the language on. What is it Page. Page two of the bill The New engrossed bill there it'd gotten rid of and Item G. R. G. is been rewarded H. has been deleted H. was deleted was actually part of an amendment number one that was added so that that came away and basically item G. now virtually mirrors the governor's emergency pocket Proclamation with the exception that the word physician is actually changed a healthcare professional to to make it more of a a technically correct a deal going forward and this also in addition to mirroring the the emergency proclamation it adds additional language to clarify that the health record must require all relevant clinical information in order to treat and then. The there is also a part added that said the cost sharing. Like copays deductibles that thing must be equally applied to virtual visits like they would be to brick and mortar visit so they don't incentivize anyone to to go away from a brick and mortar Facilities and that is basically Amendment number three amendment number four. As the word commercial onto a line I guess it was more of a technical correction they caught after at the very end of the bill so those are the four amendments I'll try to answer any questions thank you though we've got a fairly good bill here before so that we can. At the All amendments are engrossed in the bill the these are just concurrence is in the Senate these are all Senate amendments. All right any questions from committee. On all four amendments. Not have a motion to adopt the amendments a discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed nay Motian carries thank you Mr Miller dimers incurred. Hey representative Johnson. Is anyone out in the hallway out there. Representative Johnson is the only. Johnson is not here representative Vaught. Not here. Okay can Kerr agenda we have one item on their representative Scott. Not here. I can. Is there anyone here that would want to run these concurrent moments for representative Johnson representative on. You can. And I can devote okay representative Boyd you're recognized. Twenty six. A committee this is H. B. eleven seventy seven. Concur in Senate Amendment. Orange the fifth one. You're recognized to present. The concurrent amendment thank you Mr chair everyone should have this concurrent Senate Amendment in front of you it changes just provide some clarity you can see some changes delete services by a healthcare professional team and substitute services in non emergency situations it said and then changes another place regional to local so I think it's pretty straightforward and would appreciate a good vote. The disk any questions from committee. Okay seeing none. You get a mo you make a motion to concur to concur with the Senate amendment. The motion is to concur with Senate Amendment. All in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed nay. Motion carries. Okay. Twenty Michael. You're recognized. Okay representative Wardlaw you're recognized to run concurrent amendment H. B. eighteen thirty six thank you Mr if you guys remember we ran that bill through here so fast late the other afternoon I told Joe that we had an amendment we didn't adopt that amendment we went ahead and sent that bill to the Senate they adopted that amendment they change that price down to five thousand just like I told you guys what happened that's all this is I'd be happy to take any questions. Any questions from committee. Seeing none you may close a close and I make a motion to concur. I have a motion to concur with the Senate amendment in discussion on the motion seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed nay thank you Mr motion carries. Your amendment is been concurred. Okay representative Alan you're recognized to run H. B. eighteen seventy one on the consent agenda. Thank you Mr chairman committees house bill eighteen seventy one by representative Scott basically says that a state supported to your for your school institution of higher education cannot discriminate against a person based on the way the way I have the way I treated saw with and when have you. They can't discriminate against the best basically the thrust of the bill. Representative Gonzalez you're you're recognized thank Mr can can they do that now. I don't know. Okay I don't is they've been discriminate against you representative no they haven't. The representative what did you have a question. You're recognized. Representan Allen do you know if this is in response to an incidence with incident with the coach and S. didn't at UA Fort Smith is that were this bill came from honestly of representative but what I can't I can't hear you I just I just told Jamie that if she went here I would write it if you I have a lot of questions and I know I'm smart enough to pull it down so to come in and. Okay but I thought I think that for the most part to the bill is homeless and and is not going to hurt anyone but I'll be happy to answer try to answer any questions. Representative Payton you're recognized. Thank you Mr so I'm it seems just quickly I'm I'm just a look at that the non discrimination based on race and definition and then it's putting in these hairstyles. Basically in the definition of of race and. However I know that there's different based on race but hair styles is. I don't know if that's something that we should be including as a government in a definition of race I mean I had greater one time now involved but the. When we talk about styles I mean I've seen some pretty wild styles you know with color or not and it seems. People of all colors do crazy things with their hairs and So I don't know I'm just hesitant that we should be including this in the definition of race expressly I mean I understand is limited to the state supported institutions but. It's the first step in and put it in the code that all employers have to. Consider the hairstyle as as they do race and skin color and and I'm hesitant I'm I'm just reading this real quickly for the first time I'm I'm pretty hesitant so I'm. I have I will be coming up with some questions if if we could get her in here to answer well I but I'll be happy to. Let her come pull it down let her come and run it if you all want me to yeah yeah representive Allen we may want to do that because I've got a number of questions from other people okay you may be able to answer those so that might be best letter come and present yeah because I don't want to be accused of killing somebody. Thank you. So will we'll pass over that. For for now. Okay representative Miller is not here so we'll pass over that. All right so I will run HB eighteen ninety. Mr you're recognized to run your bill. Thank you Mr vice chair. This is a story that many of you have already heard but for those of you who have not I want to repeat some information some you only recall that I ran a resolution last session to ask the governor's office to apply for a hundred million dollar grant for the University of Arkansas to try to run a are in the project basically to reclaim nuclear fuel rods and that resolution passed through both houses got to the governor's office and through many discussions nothing really happened with that so what I want to do is put that in the form of a bill in an intern study but I want to go over some information here for those of you who may not of heard it. So what H. B. eighteen ninety is is an act to create a study on the commercial application of existing nuclear technology to reclaim and repurpose spent nuclear fuel rods. So starting back in August of twenty sixteen there were various committees commissions companies federal agencies that started discussions on recycling or re purposing spent nuclear fuel rods that are generated every nuclear plant in the country. this discussion centered around the new nuclear technology. That's used. The new nuclear technology that has been proven this new technology has been proven in the Argonne national laboratory in Illinois working through a grant to the university of Illinois at Chicago. So the technology has been proven in the laboratory and they have produced fuel from the spent nuclear fuel rods what has not been proven is the feasibility of the commercial application of this new technology. Here in Arkansas we have nuclear one the power generation plant over the Russellville that has operated safely for more than thirty years I don't know exactly how many years but it's been there for quite a while nuclear one and many other nuclear plants around the nation. Have the simply stored the spent fuel rods in a designated area of their parking lot those of you that were on joint energy and went to the meeting we had over there and twenty nineteen saw those fuel rods stored on that parking lot with the orange fence around. That's what you see at three hundred nuclear plants throughout the United States. actually there has been a plan of New Hampshire I believe it is that has closed and the only thing left is the parking lot fuel rods in the orange offense because there's nothing there there's nothing they can do with that this new technology. If proven commercially feasible could solve a nuclear waste problem that currently has no solution. What this bill does is to create an interim study to be run by the joint public health welfare and labor committee in cooperation with the University of Arkansas argon national labs in the department of energy and environment. the goal of this study would be to prove the feasibility of re purposing nuclear fuel waste federal grants are available for this project and the University of Arkansas as agreed to develop programs utilizing these grants to reach this goal. so with that I won't go into there's a lot more detail to this but. We've got an issue we need to solve which is we need to address the nuclear waste and nobody's doing that and the second thing is that we could bring a hundred million dollars to the state of Arkansas development program through our flagship university train a lot of technicians and engineers build a model plant and if it proves it proves feasible we could have rate economic growth in our state and it's a safe process which we've proven that with nuclear one man and also for over thirty years so I I know I wanted like detail but I'd be happy to take any questions. Seeing no questions. Does anyone know audit speak for against the bill Mr price the one signed up to speak for against the bill. Seeing none new clothes for your bill close make a motion to pass once proper motion the discussion on the motion. Seeing none all those in favor say aye aye All opposed seven congratulations your bill is passed thank you Mr thank you Committee. Do you have another bill while you're down there representative. Okay. Mister you are recognized to present your second bill. Thank you Mr chairman of the committee this is S. B. five ninety five five ninety five and I'd like to ask more quiet and Martina. She here. Your way from DHS to join me it's stable. We. You would introduce yourself for the record and you guys are recognized to present your bill thank Mister Clark what was what and who's Services. The Committee. This bill this bill Mr chairman as that the Department sorry clarifies that the Department of Human Services is the entity that regulates long term care facilities the clarification is necessary because different types of facilities are regulated by different offices under the DHS umbrella inconsistent references existing current law the bill also as language to clarify that is the department's division of provider services and quality assurance that is responsible for facility Sir surveys to ensure that so these are complying with the law. The bill does not make any substantive changes to the regulation of long term care facilities. I'd be happy to take any questions. And the smart did you have something to and. This also said that there's no non opposition to this bill. Any questions or committee. C. N. ninety one in the audience speak for against the bill. Mr price's anyone signed up to speak for against the bill. Senator you closing your bill I'm ready to close from bill and I make a motion to pass. As a proper motion all those in favor say aye. All those opposed congratulations Mister your bill is passed thank you Mr chairman thank you Committee. Okay committee so we're. A. The Committee I want to move down to senator urban's Bills she can't be with us this afternoon so I want to make sure that we get to her bills. The city was the first. Senator Irvin S. B. three ninety five. Are you prepared to run that one yes Sir yes Mister chair you're recognized thank you Mr chairman per subcommittee Senate bill three ninety five and what this bill does is it allows for diagnostic laboratory services to have a five hundred dollar annual caps and then we also separated out the diagnostics for from radiology services and then we created a radiology services cap of five hundred the reason why we did this is because if you'll recall we added chiropractic visits to to qualify for Medicaid patients as their allotted time allotted visits and so generally Kirk chiropractors are utilizing the radiology services and then when they go back for their primary care they may not have they've may have used up that five hundred dollars and they need that money for their lab trials and blood draws that they need to manage their diabetes within insult you know all those different types of blood cams so what that does though is that it creates the necessary and paperwork and process to go and file an EEO be with is extension of benefits and to try to get that approved in order to treat your patients so that we worked with Medicaid and DHS to work this to to make this a five hundred for both of those categories you still have the ability to appeal in either of those buckets of money for any B. but you had the separate those things out because you can imagine the cost of radiology sometimes can one task could eat the whole five hundred dollars up so I think this is a good move to help out that Medicaid recipients increase our benefits. Senator Irvin the Bill references COVID nineteen emergency. How does that play into this it did raise this question or. Well I know I think I mean those are just in the findings section of this and it yes it it did raise it did raise the pressure I think on the system for Medicaid patients and so that's another part of this bill is that if it's considered an essential health benefit it would not be considered part of the cap so those will be out this would not be counted against that five hundred dollars something thank you. Boy you're recognized for a question. Thank you and and you probably are the right person as but I just want to ask and if you know the answer that's great if not we'll just move on so I guess my first question is like and had a CT scan or an MRI I mean this five hundred dollars going to cover that and then also like what about genetic testing that can be hi I'm is five hundred dollars going to cover that is is well I mean. Well I those are very very expensive tests so an MRI is gonna usually run you between five hundred six hundred dollars and you you you have to apply for an extension of benefits in order to get those test and to get the proper authorization in order to get those tests. Senate Johnson you're recognized. Thank you Mr so. If I if I understand this correctly you're putting an annual five hundred dollar cap on specific services so there is an existing five hundred dollar cap for agnostic services but it was all lumped in together so you had radiology and diagnostics all in one bucket and what we're saying is when you go back and you look at the the usage of that five hundred dollar annual. Back basically budget that they get it's a it's exceeded most all the time it's always exceeded and so this is a step to try to really reflect what's more accurate for Medicaid patients but again they they do exceed that but in order to exceed it you have to apply for an extension of benefits and an authorization to get that paid for it would be two buckets of five of five hundred dollars SO I'm trying figure out thank and and to eliminate if it's covered as an essential health benefits then that's not going to count against that back it so that also helps alleviate that pressure. Is there an app on that. At no there's no cap on that that's that's just going to be that is at it's what's already covered under meditation of current cap or not now I mean the current cap is five hundred for both of them we're just trying to extend that to a thousand basically but separating out the two different categories. Follow Mr yes can one problem so if that. If that cap. I guess I'm trying to understand the difference between what is current and what is. Going to be future practice if this passes the current practice they can apply for something to exceed the five hundred dollars I see in that had not in the back extension of and then there is no cap. On that if they get that way for the cap is five hundred dollars right now it's the cap would be a thousand but you have to still apply for over five hundred to go to the thousand but there's a bucket already set there and then there's no cap on the extension if they. Get approved for an extension just like today correct thank you. Representative Boyd you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair and and I'm for this bill so in and I don't expect you to be a. An expert in all this but I'm still a little concerned that the caps are not high enough yeah you know without creating a lot of bureaucracies or medical staff you know we get past some good bills and and done some good things to reform the tradition Medicaid program so like we passing good legislation on coal and R. colon cancer awareness and such and so there's more information on genetic testing looking for Lynch syndrome but I mean that's not an inexpensive tests or or is this going to allow our Medicaid recipients to the be the benefit of that do you have any in and per or thoughts on that. I'm gonna I would defer to DHS to answer the questions about genetic testing and that being a benefit for Medicaid patients I'll defer to DHS and and he can answer that question but I I hear you I understand you and your correct one hundred percent on the mark it does create a lot of bureaucratic and I say your contact and I don't mean that to be at I don't mean that to be negative it creates paperwork and it creates time and effort and all of that on behalf of the person trying to provide that service to that Medicaid patients and so you know we're trying to reduce that but that also creates paperwork in time and energy on the side a DHS so at some point you can have to look at your R. O. Y. and see what does this make sense or not and so that's what we looked at this and it just honestly didn't make sense that were raised in incrementally and I think this is that a good a good place that we landed thank you. President Payton you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mister senator. We don't set the cap Medicaid is that the cap is that correct. At well I mean. That we do we do it by legislation our Medicaid well I'm answer here from going Medicaid I mean your bill sets the floor for the cat. It's not saying the cap would say in a cap of that least five hundred dollars we're having to appeal to Medicaid right to give us a cap of at least five hundred but if they were to offer a cap of seven fifty or a thousand your bill then prohibit that doesn't. I don't. When a conveyance of all I'll let Mr white's answer your question. Please include your seventy represent thank Mister Clark what part and services from understand your question correctly it does not prevent us from doing and a higher cap that were to come to you all in rulemaking so you have to prove the rule but that would be permitted under the bill so it's setting the floor for the cap that's my understanding yes okay thank you thank you Mr. Any other questions from committee. Seeing none anyone here to speak against the bill for the bill. Seeing none are you ready close close for your bill yes I have that I think this is a good thing for Medicaid beneficiaries representative a representative cloud you're recognized. I have a motion do pass by representative cloud any discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye hi All opposed nay. Motion carries graduation your bill is passed thank you members are you prepared to run. The S. C. R. seven I do and if I could have doctor. Dr bears to come yes please come forward please introduce yourself and who you represent. The Michael J. bear on the director the only thirty Rockefeller Cancer Institute. Senator you may proceed so the members I just want to call your attention to the great work that you helped us do two years ago for NCI designation for UAMS in the winter P. Rockefeller cancer center and that brought us doctor beer. And we're really happy that he's here sitting next to us but what we're really happy about is the fact that patients are now going to be able to stay home and get treatment that they need and that's what's so important with NCI designation and so what we have to you today for asking for your approval is really A. M. concurrent resolution by and my team of Republican women legislators to work so hard on this with other members of the legislature and we're just really proud of the progress that has been made under doctor beer the account the reporting and the accountability of this is very important and that comes to us and the legislature so what we call your attention to that to those reports but if you read this resolution I think it's incredibly important to know that you know we are really working up the the ladder to get where we need to B. as quickly as we possibly can and that the money that we have set aside for this is incredibly important to preserve in order to keep us marching down that path and to achieve the ad that NCI designation and if you'll allow I'd like Dr beer to make comments yes doctor bill you're recognized Mr chairman members of the committee thank you very much for this opportunity to point out a couple of highlights as was stated there is complete alignment within the University of Arkansas for medical sciences for commitment to bring the with R. P. Rockefeller Cancer Institute to NCI designation I can say with almost almost metaphysical certitude that without this state support for this we will not get the designation or the designation will come in a very long time so these monies are absolutely critical and we do have such Q. six months reports where we are the check being as. Transparency into twelve months I've affected leaving here we have hired As of today twelve flat base investigators. they're showing up this year they will be bringing another five million dollars of NCI funding with them. And I suspect over the next year that number will go to somewhere around twenty or twenty five lad these investigators which is critical for our path to designation in addition to that we're hiring medical in colleges and doubling the size of rheumatology oncology we will have a very large portfolio of clinical trials for our cancer patients and finally we are setting up a a committee are reaching the age of in which is an odd term but what is essentially does it extends to the Winthrop Rockefeller reach throughout its catchment areas with the NCI wants us to do the catchment areas the state of Arkansas so we will be providing cancer screening mammography cancer services and clinical trials to every patient in Arkansas who needs it. So I I E. I will just finish up by saying speak for the universe serving with winter P. Rockefeller cancers to that we are very grateful for the resolution and continued support thank you and I'll answer any questions about this process. Committee at any questions. But not dry no this is a great step forward for our state we appreciate you coming here being part of this appreciate you all bring in that forward and sounds like a good progress are you prepared to close yes members and I I just wanna take the opportunity we we did get the appropriation house this morning so in joint budget so that'll come before you in the U. M. S. appropriation bill and the amendment and so we're just we're grateful for the commitment that this legislature has made to towards us for the you know for our citizens in Arkansas and in their fight against cancer and I just want to shout out to some of my friends in this arena to representative Alan has been a champion with us and I really appreciate you and and then members of the committee on that this is separate from the bill that I also want to thank you for your work that you did on the rare diseases bill you really helps at this committee help make that a better bill so I really do want to say that to that I appreciate your work on the rare diseases bill that represented great in our time so but that I'm close to and appreciate a good vote representative bill you're recognized for motion. Yep motion. Do pass. I have a do pass by representative Alan. I can call on someone else you're not slow. That would be an honor for us to be an honor for for you to do that with the for us all right we have a motion by representative Alan do pass in discussion on the motion seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye All opposed nay moshing carries thank you thank you so much Mister chairman was of the committee. Okay committee we're gonna. Go back up the agenda thank. Okay we'll go back up to the regular agenda. And we'll go to H. B. nineteen ten representive Christiansen are you ready to present that bill. You're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman members of the committee good morning. It Christiansen representative district forty seven. And we're discussing house bill nineteen ten this is to amend the law concerning the authority of the Arkansas fire protection services board. For those of you who may not know this not try to make it very brief the Arkansas fire protection services board is the outgrowth of the old fire protection services board the state fire academy advisory board and the eight thirty three funds board currently the eight thirty three portion of the fire protection services board is administered through Adam but that is a different story and that's not what we're here to discuss but it is always in play with the fire protection services board regarding our fire departments and our firefighters. Currently there is a law. Statutes seventeen dash three dash one oh two that goes back into the nineteen eighties with the Arkansas forestry the Arkansas forestry states in there law during a time when they were really pushing wildland fire suppression training that no convicted felon can be a firefighter in the fire service in the state of Arkansas it is it is not of an ambiguous statute it's barely says absolutely not. However under law we have absolutely no provision to remove a convicted felon should he be discovered in a fire service whether it is paid or volunteer. The majority of departments in the state of Arkansas over nine hundred or more volunteer fire departments. So under civil service in a paid department such as little rock or north little rock that would be handled in house and they would eliminate that problem at the source. This bill would allow the fire protection services board to then revoke the certification of any firefighter who has been convicted of a felony felony in the past or while he is serving as a firefighter there is an appeals process built into this and the state fire academy would be the repository of any decertification records. The state fire chiefs the Arkansas fire protection services board. The attorney general's office and the Arkansas fire academy director Rachel Nicks are all on board with this bill or I would not be here. What we're seeking to do is. Handle the issue of trust. A firefighter comes in your house of two or three o'clock in the morning everything you stand for is like a bloomin onion at outback it's peeled open for you to see how you live what you stand for. As a former fire chief I can tell you when you go into somebody's house you have to respect that. Every now and then they're bad actors is this bill go all the way no it does not but it's like pac man it takes one bite at a time to get us where we need to go. Seoul oftentimes there's no way to get a firefighter who is a felon. Out because there's no repository to do that there's no agency to do that and so this seeks to do that is it a problem yes it is a major problem not at the present time but it can be so this is the right step forward it gives the ability of our state to give a state entity the authority to carry out of state law that is already in statute but has no agency that can do that. This is highly endorsed by the firefighters because there is no difference in professionalism between a paid firefighter or a volunteer when you take that oath when you take that job and you make the run you are there to do the very best and I will entertain any questions from committee. A representative I've got a question this may not pertain to what you're the bill but on line thirty two there's says the decision to the Pulaski County circuit court. Why is it Pulaski County that is the central location for the state as far as the firefighters are concerned offices of different agencies are in this area and that makes a standardized place instead of moving all across the state. Any questions committee. Yes representive you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman so tell me exactly what your bill is saying when it comes to a person that has been convicted of a felony so phone can you know what categories fall into felony and I served to for four years on the parole board. So I'm from for me with this so I'm asking you to tell me. do we have a lot of felons Act of us trying to become firefighters own one of. I'm I'm glad you asked that representative Alan because yes we do today is kind of a permissive society where we feel if we want to do it we get the right to get a pass to do it. Again the it is not a major issue but it has been an ongoing issue as long as the fire service's been in Arkansas there is no teeth in the ability to do certify someone I'm talking certification here when you go into law enforcement your train through the commission of law enforcement standards and training through classed very simple they also are the ones that will be certify you if you're about actor. This bill does not get us where we want to go but it is a very very important step to get us there. If we have a firefighter who becomes a felon for whatever reason wall is in the fire service even though the law says he can't be that we have no triggering device to be able to say okay now you cannot be this seeks to plug that loophole in the law because if you are a law enforcement officer and you commit a crime. You're the certified. In the fire service if you commit a crime you can be fired from that department you can be booted off the Department but you can go to Mountain Home and do the same thing there or you can go to Fort Smith or you can go somewhere else because you're certification is not removed so this is a first step towards being able to have certification which is done through the academy and do certification which would be done through the old academy Advisory Board the fire protection services board they're linked at the hip to marry together and the AG's office looked at this very very carefully and said this is an important step to make sure that we handle that ability. If I answered your question somewhat I have another member I'm just wait. Recognized for follow up you have one. Okay I'm sorry Mr. Representative Coleman you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman. If you have a firefighter this bill or volunteer fire department in the conviction of a felon is there any way that he can continue to serve on this for department of all the members are happy with them and is filling is not anything if they feel like we can. Been in pain Stadium but far representative Coleman that's a great question let me try to answer in two parts very quickly. There is no intent on the part of the fire protection services border the fire chiefs to keep someone who is qualified from fighting fire but we have to follow the law so the first step we have to do is get the triggering mechanism in place that they can be decertified the fire protection services board is poised to write rules regarding felons in the fire service and giving a path forward for somebody who may redeem himself let's say we have a child at eighteen nineteen twenty twenty one twenty two he gets convicted of a drug offense and he served time Fortner has a felony rap. Grows up finds his faith has good wife could children pillar of the community he may be exactly the person that a volunteer fire chief needs to support his department be able to go forward so in discussion we realize that there has to be a path forward at present there is not but it's like putting pieces of the puzzle together we have to put this in place then we have to address the law that is already on the books to see if we can alter that law to allow felons to serve in the far from the fire fighting service because we're bound by that law right now that is an absolute no. So once we get this in place we have the triggering device they can promulgate rules and move forward we can address in another session we can address the need to maybe modify that law. But again this is an issue of trust and transparency as a former fire chief and former chairman of the State Farm prevention commission for eighteen years. This is a problem that has arisen from time to time and as far back as that there has been no way for us to handle if you were a convicted felon thirty years ago when you're on a roll department they won't know about it. It might be caught in a background check if you go somewhere else but if you're they're grandfathered in they're not gonna know about it. But if you have a felony conviction while you're there then this law would allow them to save and we'll work on it later but we have to be able to have this is a piece of the puzzle to plug loopholes we have now. President going you're recognized okay so so that's that's and no they're going to be removed but you're looking at having some rules that may allow them to. To serve absolutely representative Coleman this there are good people out there who found themselves in a bad situation earlier in life I'm not a court I can't change that and I can't change this so we presented to you but at this point all we do want to see that as can be made for people who are of good quality who've served their time and want to move forward but again it's a matter of trust integrity and the ability to navigate the law. Any other questions from committee. Seeing none anyone here who would like to speak against the bill. For the bill. Seeing none are you ready close for your bill Mr chairman I am in committee I ask your indulgence in this in a good vote because this is. Fundamentally we have a law on the books that we cannot enforce I do not expect a land rush of people coming up and going I I'm a solemn I'm leaving but I do feel that this is putting the pieces in place that help us make a better state of Arkansas and I ask the do pass on this. What's will of committee. Representive cloud you're recognized. I have a motion do pass the discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed nay. Motion carries measure your bill is passed. You have a another bill on our agenda. Chairman I do have nineteen nineteen. Are you prepared to run that bill I am prepared to run that bill okay committee this is HB nineteen nineteen you're recognized representative thank you Mr chairman committing this is a more we've heard this all session long this is a simple bill. Unfortunately this bill is interpreted as a shot fired at the nursing industry and let's get right to the chase it is not only sixteen states in the United states require nursing homes to have liability insurance we are not one of those states in this bill does not seek. For. Anyway ask that that come forward if we ask for liability insurance in the state of Arkansas right now on our nursing facilities we would raise the cost of health care and that is certainly not what we're asking this is a senate bill that ask for disclosure of your liability insurance status if you go to Tennessee you will find an eleven by seventeen of card details whether they are insured. Self insured or not insured at all and on that card it will be required if they are insured to give the name of the carrier and the policy limitations if they are self insured it will require that they give. The responsible party. We're not seeking that. We're seeking simple disclosure in the state of Arkansas that when you sign a contract to service. Let it be disclosed in the contract of service whether this facility is insured self insured or not insured. There are those who feel that this is an invasion of of. Kind of a sacred or secular scientific you will domain of the nursing homes I have a little experience in this field. My father did nursing home installations for over forty years. I can't tell you how many beds I've assembled bedside cabinets over bed tables are kitchens I've set up. I've seen good things and bad things with nursing facilities so this bill is neutral in the middle. This is not oppressive but it is constituent brought because how many of you. No that nursing homes are not insured in the state of Arkansas before I said that. You saying. Most people don't. If I go to representative Payton's. Used car lot can I buy a vehicle. Get a contract that says with that vehicle is warranted or not. It's simple we have that in law they do that as a matter of course without. The thought. This does not seek to expose a nursing home to more lawsuits by saying that they have insurance or not in fact it may do the exact opposite it may illuminance eliminate some frivolous lawsuits that come forward so my question is the opposition what are they hiding and why are they thinking that this is a bad deal. These are decisions we make about our most vulnerable section of society and by the grace of god for LAR if we're healthy enough to move forward and wind up in a nursing facility the decisions we make here affect our care. They do that in every bill that we pass. So a nursing home already requires an arbitration agreement when you sign a contract of service they require an arbitration agreement so you already know that if you're going to sue the path you have to go through and if an attorney is going to sue they already know by looking at the income statement in the cost statements that a nursing makes. But whether or not they're insured this is asking disclosure for consumers it's a simple disclosure bill. I believe our president of Allen have a question and I'll stop from representative Alan you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr. My question to you. If. What are you asking for proof of liability insurance what we've been doing in the state of Arkansas it's been working so when you start asking for liability insurance with these companies such as the nursing home then what you're doing in such a way and this is just my belief is that you open up that Pandora's box. For that person to to start filing lawsuits when you put it out there it in the in the comparison that you made with with the used car is totally totally different from a nursing home you know that's are comparing apples to apples when you used the used car example is totally different from from a nursing home or hospital. Resent Allen I appreciate that and I do understand where you're coming from for a long time we have operated under the illusion that the nursing home doesn't factor of insurance and so this clarifies that in transparency I see your concern but I don't share it in that we would be opening up a Pandora's box for lawsuits. As I said you have statement that you already have to sign an arbitration agreement and if a lawsuit were to come about automatically the attorneys are going to know whether that insurance policies in effect or not we don't require that in the state this doesn't sector this is a transparency bill that any one of us would want to know when we go buy something or we stay somewhere we do something. Whether they're insured or not not that we're necessarily going to sue somebody but it's become to be the practice norm in society. Many of my constituents are concerned because they've had experiences and they were surprised to find out that they didn't have insurance is that gonna open the door for lawsuits not at all again you have Medicaid patients who are going to go to a facility that is going to limit where they're going to go you have folks of certain economic statuses that are not going to be able to drive across the state to put a lot of one in and if this does anything at all it might make for the families who know you're going to a nursing facility without insurance be more attentive to grandpa or grandma or mom and dad and go there and visit with them more often. It should make the facilities want to hold her head up and say we don't need it. Okay good we do. Yes Sir. Representative Alan you're recognized for the following year my question is when you go stay in a hotel. Do you ask the hotel they have liability insurance is it disclose this distance of no no okay so in an employment if you stand in a a facility like that you that you would want to know that they have a hole had and liability insurance it is generally known that that's an industry norm and hostile RES yes. Repeat that again it is generally known that that's an industry norm that hotels do carry liability insurance well into the General known that nursing homes care insurance it is assumed that nursing homes carry liability insurance okay so as assume that the hotel cares liability insurance to. So what my point is that if we start doing this so there's no we don't start doing it everywhere. So I'm not and I believe in and Transparency. But I just think that sometimes we regulate stuff that don't need to be regulated we come up with all these laws that we don't really need any of our one to House some people come up with some of this stuff I guess just be at home it might be start dreaming about a this is a good bill you talked to your friend but the representative Allen we got other questions well let me finish okay okay represented to you you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr. So representative Christian do you have any information just alone across the industry in Arkansas how many of our insured how are they not insured or the self insured or In anything that I mean if I were in business I'm a business person not have insurance so I can imagine I'm functioning without carrying some form of liability insurance represented me do they do in fact some of the holding companies that actually have several homes do have policies that cover that summer selfinsured and some absolutely are not insured at all. All. Their defense to that and and frankly liability insurance in this state could run higher than five thousand dollars per bed per person for a nursing facility which becomes an incredibly economically high burden so this doesn't seek to do that but constituents want to know and a lot of people have the the I believe we have the right to know whether a facility that we entrust our loved ones to. It's covered or not it may not make a single decision. As to how you move forward which you would know they would know that you know we would not be hiding behind the illusion. That they have it only to find out that they don't. And this simply makes a disclosure not and and represent a valid answer your question no I did not lay awake at night they're trying to figure this out representative Mickey you're recognized for follow up but. Do you do you know a percentage I mean can you tell me how many hours it seventy five percent of our insured I cannot answer any representative exactly how the number but I can tell you that probably the war and I say this probably based on a little bit of knowledge but I can't give you the figures. But there are homes that are insured there are some that are not okay thank you Mr representative Terry you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman representative Christiansen I'm looking at some of this and being an insurance guy I'm kind of shaking my head understand why. But on line on line one page two it talks about having a status That a failure to provide insurance status or declaration so if you give a you give them declaration information also supplied liability limits which of course would open up. Potential for additional lawsuits known what kind of liability limits they have in the end is this correct if they failed to report this it's a fifteen thousand dollar fine for each offense. So basically you're nursing homes will be out of business for that they leave off a piece of paper representative Perry. First of all this is not ask for you to give a limit on what your coverages the state of Tennessee does we do not. It says include liability insurance status or decoration which means whether you are insured or not it does not want to seek an amount does not. In the contractor the fifteen thousand dollar fine as a negotiable point and this is been out there long enough since it is been filed and I've met with several people within the industry in the opposition and they have not once said. Could you negotiate that down have a fifteen hundred dollar fine which were perfectly amenable to. The fact of the matter is not punitive. But like you for the justice said the smoking ban it this might be an attention getter bring to the table is talking so we can have a consensus. That offer was out there we have not received that. Many of my constituents want to know. Is the home insured or not. That's the simple question is asked it is not a punitive bill. Representative Coleman you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman. Owned business accurate liability insurance and personally to protect myself and I never felt like is anybody business how much insurance I had because. If they knew they'd sue for more and sometimes when people have the limits on the liability insurers a lawsuit will be settled for that but you just find it out. After which and so. If you wanna have liability insurance questions with this requirement has a liability insurance and let the. Whoever they do their last and will have that that part of it because this doesn't reduce their liability to an individual. This in their care if something happens to them that's our fault budget no it is not representative Coleman but it also does not seek to ask an insured or not insured party if they have injured to disclose the amount of insurance they have it does not ask that it asked their liability insurance status or declaration information and that declaration status means are you insured are you self insured or not insured but there is no request for monetary value on that. Representative cloud you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman representative Christiansen use that many of your constituents want to know. my question is is couldn't they ask if they're looking for a nursing home to place a loved one in its simply simply ask if that's a real concern for they simply can ask for having admitted some people to nursing homes and having asked that question the conversation was in the verdict and we also do this. And it was very adroitly sidestepped and had to be asked four or five times in order to find out whether they had insurance or not. The fear is as representative Coleman rightly said is somebody going to come after this facility because they do have liability insurance this does not ask somebody to go after nor do I think we're opening a Pandora's box to go after facility it is a simple declaration that's going to be found out at the beginning the middle or the end. And and this is simply a matter transparency we talk a good line about transparency a lot this is something that is very simple and should not have a lot of pushback from the industry it does but it should not because it is a simple bill that says we do or we don't and you make the decision for you go from there. Thank you. Representative Gonzalez you're recognized the thing Mr but I will be in my time I think we've had enough discussion on the simple bills of. Will move on from. Representative Terri recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman at. At the end of actually Dr cloud entered as one of my questions but so liability insurance it doesn't state what kind so where are we going to also require them to verify they have work comp automobile liability general liability. Health insurance I mean how far do we go. They have to already do those things in order to have their license and move forward hospitals after insurance of the things is does not seek to get into that arena at all they already meet that criteria in order to operate. Representative gray you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chair that's one thing by the way the bills written it says declaration information and I in a prior life was I had my insurance license is in a deck page list your policy number your limits your deductible so based on industry standard of that wording that would require them to list their limits that was not the intent of this law representative very whatsoever the intent of this law was to specifically address the issue of whether they had self insured or not insured and when we put things in language in the bills often bill drafters do things to put things within code I'm I'm glad to specify that that is not the intent of this bill and if we need to change that I'm more than willing to change that and one follow up Mr yes you're recognized thank you you mentioned earlier about arbitration agreements and I'm not sure if you've been following the Biden administration and the changes they want to make to long term care but one of their main priorities is actually to do away with arbitration agreements for nursing homes and I see this bill is just a preemptive strike to try and open up more lawsuits if those arbitration agreements were to be dismissed by the by demonstration would you not agree with that not necessarily but I do so you're concerned representative gray and again this is simply transparency it is not an effort to be oppressive or over regulating thank you. Representative not so you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chair in light of all the various conversation back and forth to fed would you want to try to pull this bill down and maybe make some changes to reflect back. Would the committee be willing to hear it again. Yes we would. Shares as we'll hear will hear. So at this point you're asking me to pull bill down representative Dotson and referred it where. At the I think you just have some work you might need to to look at I don't. Not sure that you're. You want to take a vote on it right now. Why sure your concerns. You may want to talk to individual committee members and see if you can address their concerns Mister chairman I'll be delighted to do that thank you thanks centers and consider the bill in suspense at the moment. Thank you representative. All right committee See we're down to the H. B. nineteen twenty three by representative Meeks I don't see him in the room. A representative **** is not here. let's see representive ray has been waiting over there so representive ray are you here to present as B. five forty seven. Okay you're recognized to present the bill. Committee it's S. B. five forty seven. Thank you Mr chairman there is an amendment come around yes it might I invite Mr Steve good to the table to help explain the bill yes thank you if you would please introduce yourself and you represent. Two more Mr chairman was a committee my name is Steve good and I represent the Arkansas grocers and retail merchants association let's give the committee a few minutes look at the amendment. Representive if you want to go ahead present your amendment you're recognized okay. Thank you Mr chair and members of the committee the amendment I'll explain the bill hopefully if you're willing to adopt the amendment but all the amendment is is language that was provided to us by the Department workforce services they preferred a different way of phrasing it than what we had originally drafted so that's what this is. I have a motion from representative Dotson to adopt the amendment the discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed nay. Motion carries your amendments been adopted you're recognized to present your bill as amended okay thank you Mr chairman and committee this bill Senate bill five forty seven is a bill that would just clarify something that we all already know to be true and that is that our Kansans to engage in direct selling are independent contractors rather than employees when we're talking about direct selling. We're talking about people who sell products for companies like Avon Mary Kay A. M. way the pampered chef of those are some of the most well known direct selling companies. I have friends that are direct sellers I'm sure each of you probably knows people in your sphere of influence that are involved in direct selling because there's approximately a hundred and seventy one thousand direct sellers in Arkansas and they account for approximately two hundred and eighty seven million in retail sales here in the state folks to engage in direct selling they're attracted to that line of work because of their flexibility with hours there's low start up costs doesn't require extensive training or specialized education to get started people as you know often sell within their own networks have house parties where they sell pampered chef FOR mery K.. so all this bill would do is make it clear that for under Arkansas law for waging our unemployment compensation and workers compensation purposes direct sellers are independent contractors that's the way our law is currently being treated in Arkansas but recently there been some challenges in certain jurisdictions around the country as to whether direct sellers are employees instead of independent contractors so while our law would probably be interpreted correctly we can make it stronger with this bill by simply using the standard that the IRS uses and that forty one other states use including all the states that border us. Without take any questions did you have any comments or. No Sir represent Ladyman he's done a perfect job of presenting the bill. Representative Dotson you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair I get the intent of the bill I'm just the The New amended language that we added in there. Can you go through that and and. Explain that for me yes Sir represent Dotson so we we actually ran this through Senate the Committee and and through the full Senate and but we did talked to dot shoulders at work for services just to make sure that there were no issues on that side the Department labor they came back with nothing at first and then I guess probably late Tuesday afternoon they reached out and said Hey look because of some language since they are one hundred percent federally funded Department because of some language that identified a year and iris code if Arkansas if iris law changed in the future and we had referenced Arkansas law to be in compliance with that today we could potentially be out of compliance with that in the future so we struck that language this is the language that work for services said they felt like was best and so B. L. R. has a drafter this for us and so this was just a change to make sure that they were satisfied that they would continue to get their federal funding so so what you're saying is if someone is. A direct seller as well as being employed. Not really don't have anything to do with as well as I mean the the the amendment just had more to do with matching up Arkansas law with iris law and making sure that there was no conflict in the future going forward. All right I'll take your word for them yes according to workforce services we were satisfied with the built first and but they're the ones are brought to our attention on Tuesday and so this is amended that they are satisfied with their they're turning actually helped look over it Mr Denton and then we got it drafted the Amendment after this morning thank you yes Sir. Okay I have a couple questions So. All right now. Does the those IRS treat these direct sellers as contractors yes Sir they did does the state of Arkansas treat them as contractors yes Sir represent Ladyman there's an ABC test that that determines that they treat them as representative is independent contactors and that is if they do these three things one sale in the home or otherwise not in a permit retail establishment to the rear remember ation is directly related to sales and then three it's pursuant to a written contract that provides a person will not be pursued are treated as an employee so that's the A. B. C. test and again that that test has been proven to be effective throughout most states in the country for the last forty years but unfortunately you've had some jurisdictions that have come in and even though the direct sellers met all through the first these criteria they said no your employee you're not a direct sell or and so the direct sellers association has reached out through our grocers and merchants who works there member of and just said Hey can you help us clarify this were they will for sure be treated as independent contractors there's no way that they can be treated as a police and a representative race point forty two other states in the IRS already recognize it that way as well and to just summarize that even more specifically our our current the way we currently categorize these folks is good this is just better. There is so just one more question minute bill answer this but so when you on our districts. Are we gonna have constituents that come to us because they're in I mean do you know of any groups organizations companies. that are in agraria now we're going to hear from somebody and say Hey I and I'm now going to have to pay a higher income tax because you did this I don't think so to ensure question because this is really not something that has happened in Arkansas but it's has happened in other states where they became treated as employees not independent contractors and so that did it so we're just trying to get out ahead of that to make sure that it doesn't happen here but we don't know of any issues today in Arkansas not today no Sir. Any other questions from committee. seeing none with. Is anyone here that would like to speak against the bill. For the bill. Seeing none your clothes for your bill I'm close for the bill thank you for your time and attention committee. Representative Coleman you're recognized. I have a motion do pass by representative Coleman. Do pass as amended. Representative gray you're recognized thank you I just want to a at matters day which do not truly think these people are independent contractors I'm going to vote no I'm not not a fuss about it not nothing I'm going to vote no just because I have I've already run a bill and I take issue with defining whether or not exceptional essentially exempting someone because even if let's I'm reading this wrong even if federal law changed because we have as of a certain date so even if federal law changes that made them employees they would still be independent contractors with us so just for consistency on my part I'm going to vote no thank. Any other discussion. Motion on floors do pass all in favor signify by saying aye. Is amended as amended thank you. Most on floors do pass as amended. All opposed nay. The ayes have it resolution your bill is passed thank you Committee thank you all. So representative makes is not here represent a wing is not here SP five fourteen Senator Davis anyone here to run that bill. Okay. S. B. five ninety is represented Wardlaw at in the hallway. Okay. Representative Wardlaw you're recognized to present S. B. five ninety committees S. B. five ninety thank you Mr chairman S. B. five ninety has an amendment I think is staff to get them in and out to the Committee. Okay let's Gillam vehemence that. If you would please introduce yourself and who you represent. Thank you Mr chairman my name is Christine criar um the chief legal counsel for the department of corrections. So. Mister are committee I haven't worked on this bill at all until this morning but I was contacted this morning by a couple departments. Within the state and they ask me to work with senator garner to work on Amendment I will tell you that there's never been easier to work with any member of my life senator garner said get amendment I'm good with it so we worked with some some different agencies have your turn to second page of amendment E. one two and three. Exempts these people from being able to have these folks will be able to have a mass mandate if they see the need for and I'll tell you I brought the department corrections to the table because you saw the news release yesterday the department of corrections is down to less than fifty cases of code nineteen within the department corrections all fifty cases are new inductees to the to the Department so you have to think back that we send all of our new inductees male and female to two different facilities so we can find out whether they're adaptable to a single sale or to a group meeting general population we don't want to send any of those people out with COVID nineteen now that we've worked that through our our departments so we want to be able to require masking those diagnostic centers to make sure we have no spread when we bring in a new inmate senator garner would allow us to do that this amendment private businesses if they want to have a mass mandate we're allowing them to make the decision on yourself we don't want to have perception of big government and then a state owned or state controlled health care facility so like you A. M. S. DHS has the human development centers those areas days still have a missions which means those emissions need to be protected and the people in those facilities need to be protected from those emissions so they're still allowed to have mass mandate with that I'd be happy to take any questions. Representative Dotson recognized. Thank you Mr I'm still kind of looking through the amendment which is I understand it is now the bill or would would now become the bill I guess the first question that pops up to me is representative Brian is being added as a co sponsor. And not you that is correct senator how to run to another committee I was never supposed to run the bill but he asked me to run it because the amendment is my amendment if you look at the access to that yeah yes Sir but I will not be running on the floor is represented brought will be the person I'm not taking his bill a from okay thank you the. Bill question represented Allen you're recognized. We'll if this pass. Will this be in conflict with the guidelines of the CDC. Of we don't think so at the current moment because it still allows those people to have mask in those places of congregation like a hospital you don't center prison does sort places what about public schools. Of public schools. Are not exempt in here. but my understanding is those superintendents are making those decisions independently today and I see doctor cloud nine is said yes that I'm saying that right. So does that mean I have to take the Klausner. Representative Greg you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chair and what about DYS do they need possibly need exclusion or should that we. I'm pretty sure they're excluded through the state owned or controlled health care facility because the most their facilities would fit under behavior health are developmental disabilities. Okay. Could I ask follow up yes for sure could I bring mark light up and just ask him to make sure okay. Yes Mister Mister wife you would come up minister self in the represent. I thank Mr Clark wide for him services I think it's request written agreed because I define healthcare facility with the west we do have some provide behavioral health others do not and so I'm not certain food plot of that and I'll I'll just apologise we first saw the member about by five minutes ago the other concern which I'm looking at and I so I don't know is I'm is not clear to me this will allow us to continue enforcing CDC guidelines for nursing homes that we regulate and that's that's another potential issue but again just having just look at this I'm I'm not certain yet. I will pull it down for this afternoon's meeting and I will add in the DYS facilities under those one two and three as a four four because I can see where the healthcare definition may not reach all their facilities because some of our foster type facilities and they they probably need added because any facilities bring in new emissions would need to be protected. Thank you and I and I support the bill fully I think doing that be be great would would that make the Department happy I think so I think the other questions that nursing home issue but we'll take a look at it will work I think it's covered under number one the private business. Because nursing homes are all private businesses for the most part right in your state owned ones are covered or number two if there is I think we're covered there we just need to cover the foster centers I'll get that amended and we'll bring it back this afternoon with the permission of the chair thank you representative. Representive L. yes recognized I have a question for represent one moment it's is we need to talk. Okay all right thank you representative Wardlaw thank you Committee sorry for the confusion. Okay or did we get to hear. Again I ask S. B. five fourteen Senator Davis is there anyone here to present the bill now S. B. six twenty one by Senator Hester is anyone here okay you're recognized. Committee this is This B. six twenty one representative Gonzales you're recognized they Mr Committee what's left of us. Senate bill six twenty ones bears senate bill bill with consent decrees over the years have been court decisions that have been handed down basically created policy in the Medicaid program as a all the although I think agree that's it's our job to to create policy so this is just saying that that we should look at those and reconsider and decide whether they should be modified notified of or we should come back and make the policy decision almost. Take any questions. Any questions from committee. Give me just a minute represent. Okay all right any questions from committee. Anyone who speak against the bill. For the bill. Seeing none you a close for your bill clothes make a motion to pass. I have a motion do pass any discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed nay. Motion carries same committee was passed. Okay Committee we've got. Get two more Senate bills here that have not been run yet. Senator Hammer SB six twenty five. Anyone on that bill. Okay Senate bill five ninety five oops. I read that one in. All right. Okay committee of. I think we're going to be done for this morning session will be back this afternoon but let me tell you they'll we're going to put. Centerman. You want to come to the table. did you want to comment on on S. B.. Three thirty two. Yes Mister chairman of the committee on. On Senate bill three thirty two I know that it has run once and so I want the opportunity just to talk about it and then I understand I think if you're going to run it will run it next Tuesday afternoon at a set time is that correct Mister chair that's correct we are going to have a special order of business for SB three thirty to at two o'clock Tuesday hold on just. Mister chair may I just yeah you're you're recognized I just wanna make sure procedurally where okay you're recognized to comment on the the bill so members we had an engrossed amendment on this bill and so if you look at the bill it is now engrossed and that amendment was per requested by and some folks with Arkansas health care association and but they are reviewing it with their attorney that word that I've gotten to me just this morning on a phone call was that and I've works diligently to try to address what was in that telephone conversation with me about that I worked diligently to try to address those concerns and put that in the engrossed amendment I am I am also they are working with their attorney and they said that they're working other bills and and I'd and so they want the opportunity to let their attorney look at at that engrossed amendment and I will yield to them I just don't want to run out of time on my bill and I've done what I I have L. hold I think my and of of of that conversation is to try to limit the focus with the engrossed amendments and and I'm trying to to do this the right way in a professional way to narrow that and to address the concerns of the committee I am awaiting word it from them I do have at the hospital association that wants to weigh in on this issue as well as folks from Baptist hospital that have been here all morning and and I do appreciate that and then I will email you or hand you personally a copy of a letter and that was that is from Tory wells he's the president and CEO of Baptist health in support of SB three three two so I would just simply we will present that on an. On Tuesday and I hope that we get word back that the amendment is acceptance Irvin so I wanted to explain engrossed amendment and then we'll run the bill on Tuesday if you would have that email to the Committee yes Mister chair because the if they're speaking for the bill we would allow the letter to be passed out in committee okay because they would need to be here to answer questions correct but they're free the email it's all the committee members okay as you have me to send it to you Mister chair or Tennyson rice. Senate to it alright we'll send it out to the committee okay that would be awesome thank you guys so much appreciate you and my time this morning. Okay committee so we will be meeting again today after session. We are adjourned.