Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (59)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1982
· 5 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…AND TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF NATURAL MEDICINE. HB1982 Wooldridge TO AMEND THE USED TIRE RECYCLING AND ACCOUNTABIL…”
|
TO AMEND THE USED TIRE RECYCLING AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT; TO CREATE THE TIRE MANAGEMENT AND … | Wooldridge | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1270
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “HB1270 Pilkington TO ESTABLISH A PRESCRIBED PEDIATRIC EXTENDED CAR…”
|
TO ESTABLISH A PRESCRIBED PEDIATRIC EXTENDED CARE PILOT PROGRAM THROUGH A SECTION 1115 MEDICAID DEMONSTRATION … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1332
· 4 mentions in transcript, agenda, chapter
Matched: “…committee. Representative Pilkington, are you ready to run House Bill 1332? All right, we'll pass out the amendment of staff. We'll ge…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO EVALUATE CLAIMS FOR DIAGNOSES FREQUENCY OF OBESITY-RELATED CONDITIONS … | Pilkington | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB9
Act 622
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “SB9 B. Davis TO CREATE THE MAKE ARKANSAS HEALTHY AGAIN ACT; AND…”
|
TO CREATE THE MAKE ARKANSAS HEALTHY AGAIN ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT MANUFACTURING, SELLING, DELIVERING, DISTRIBUTING, … | B. Davis | Notification that SB9 is now Act 622 |
|
HB1468
Act 558
· 3 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…yne Long CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1468 Cozart TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING CLAIMS AGAINST HOME…”
|
TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING CLAIMS AGAINST HOME IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTORS, RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CONTRACTORS, AND SUPPLIERS. | Cozart | Notification that HB1468 is now Act 558 |
|
HB1008
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…HEALTHCARE PROVIDER. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1008 A. Collins TO REQUIRE MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR POSTPARTUM MOTH…”
|
TO REQUIRE MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR POSTPARTUM MOTHERS FOR ONE YEAR AFTER GIVING BIRTH. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1010
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1010 A. Collins TO SET THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE IN THE ARKANSAS ME…”
|
TO SET THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE IN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM FOR MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICES. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1011
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1011 A. Collins TO CREATE THE RESTORE ROE ACT; AND TO RESTORE A…”
|
TO CREATE THE RESTORE ROE ACT; AND TO RESTORE A WOMAN'S ACCESS TO ABORTION SERVICES. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1012
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1012 A. Collins TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO EXTE…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO EXTEND ELIGIBILITY TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS FOR FAMILY PLANNING … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1013
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…BILITY TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS FOR FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES. HB1013 Hudson TO PROTECT FERTILITY TREATMENT RIGHTS IN THIS STATE.…”
|
TO PROTECT FERTILITY TREATMENT RIGHTS IN THIS STATE. | Hudson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1029
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…Hudson TO PROTECT FERTILITY TREATMENT RIGHTS IN THIS STATE. HB1029 D. Garner TO SET THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE IN THE ARKANSAS MED…”
|
TO SET THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE IN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND … | D. Garner | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1032
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1032 A. Collins TO BAN CONVERSION THERAPY.”
|
TO BAN CONVERSION THERAPY. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1132
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1132 Pilkington TO INCREASE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE SERVICES PROVID…”
|
TO INCREASE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE SERVICES PROVIDED BY ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSES; AND TO AMEND … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1224
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1224 Nazarenko TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR…”
|
TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT; AND TO APPLY THE AUTOMATIC … | Nazarenko | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1244
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1244 K. Brown TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE…”
|
TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF FULL INDEPENDENT PRACTICE AUTHORITY BY A … | K. Brown | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1302
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…MEDICAID DEMONSTRATION WAIVER; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. HB1302 L. Johnson TO ADD DUCHENNE MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY TO THE UNIVER…”
|
TO ADD DUCHENNE MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY TO THE UNIVERSAL NEWBORN SCREENING ACT. | L. Johnson | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1532
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…G UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD TO INCLUDE PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS. HB1532 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS RARE DISEASE ADVISORY COU…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS RARE DISEASE ADVISORY COUNCIL. | L. Johnson | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1566
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…hnson TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS RARE DISEASE ADVISORY COUNCIL. HB1566 McClure TO REQUIRE ADOPTION OF A STATEWIDE PRACTICAL NURSIN…”
|
TO REQUIRE ADOPTION OF A STATEWIDE PRACTICAL NURSING PROGRAM CORE CURRICULUM TO INCREASE CONSISTENCY IN … | McClure | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1588
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1588 McAlindon TO REQUIRE APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BEFOR…”
|
TO REQUIRE APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES SEEKS OR … | McAlindon | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1592
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…LUM TO INCREASE CONSISTENCY IN PRACTICAL NURSING EDUCATION. HB1592 J. Mayberry TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ALZHEIMER'S AND DEMENTIA…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ALZHEIMER'S AND DEMENTIA PUBLIC HEALTH ACT. | J. Mayberry | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1723
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…EVACUATION IN HEALTHCARE FACILITIES LICENSED IN THIS STATE. HB1723 Pilkington TO AMEND INITIATED ACT 1 OF 2000, ALSO KNOWN AS…”
|
TO AMEND INITIATED ACT 1 OF 2000, ALSO KNOWN AS THE TOBACCO SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS ACT; … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1731
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1731 Vaught TO STRENGTHEN CHILD LABOR LAWS THROUGH THE REINSTATE…”
|
TO STRENGTHEN CHILD LABOR LAWS THROUGH THE REINSTATEMENT OF EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATES. | Vaught | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1762
Act 1009
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…AN EXPANSION OF COVERAGE FOR THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM. HB1762 Hall TO REQUIRE REVOCATION OF A PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL OF…”
|
TO REQUIRE REVOCATION OF A PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE IN AN AGRICULTURAL … | Hall | Notification that HB1762 is now Act 1009 |
|
HB1776
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1776 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE CERTIFICATE OF NEED REQUIRED TO OBTA…”
|
TO AMEND THE CERTIFICATE OF NEED REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A SOLID WASTE LANDFILL OR TRANSFER … | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1781
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1781 Crawford TO AUTHORIZE THE LICENSURE OF CLINICS, HEALTH CENT…”
|
TO AUTHORIZE THE LICENSURE OF CLINICS, HEALTH CENTERS, OR OTHER FACILITIES IN WHICH A PREGNANCY … | Crawford | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1791
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…NSION OF A SOLID WASTE LANDFILL OR TRANSFER STATION PERMIT. HB1791 C. Cooper TO CLARIFY THAT THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND…”
|
TO CLARIFY THAT THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND THE UNITED NATIONS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION … | C. Cooper | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1795
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…VE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE OR IMPLEMENT ACTIONS IN THIS STATE. HB1795 A. Brown TO CREATE THE FERTILITY CLINIC LICENSURE ACT. HB18…”
|
TO CREATE THE FERTILITY CLINIC LICENSURE ACT. | A. Brown | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1818
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1818 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE MEDICAID PROVIDER-LED CARE TRANSPA…”
|
TO CREATE THE MEDICAID PROVIDER-LED CARE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT. | L. Johnson | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1819
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1819 L. Johnson TO REQUIRE THE STATE REGISTRAR OF VITAL RECORDS…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE STATE REGISTRAR OF VITAL RECORDS TO COORDINATE WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS … | L. Johnson | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1880
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1880 Hudson TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS HUMAN LIFE PROTECTION ACT AND…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS HUMAN LIFE PROTECTION ACT AND THE ARKANSAS UNBORN CHILD PROTECTION ACT … | Hudson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1882
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1882 Pilkington TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF ENROLLABLE MEDICAID B…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF ENROLLABLE MEDICAID BENEFICIARY POPULATION AND ALLOW THE GOVERNOR TO DESIGNATE … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1890
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ND TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT RECORDS FOR INDIVIDUALS. HB1890 J. Mayberry TO ALLOW SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO BILL FOR HEALTHCAR…”
|
TO ALLOW SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO BILL FOR HEALTHCARE SERVICES; AND TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID … | J. Mayberry | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1906
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…REIMBURSE SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR CERTAIN HEALTHCARE SERVICES. HB1906 Lundstrum TO REQUIRE WRITTEN CONSENT OF A PARENT OR LEGAL G…”
|
TO REQUIRE WRITTEN CONSENT OF A PARENT OR LEGAL GUARDIAN WHEN PRESCRIBING LONG-ACTING REVERSIBLE CONTRACEPTION … | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1908
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TION TO A PERSON WHO IS YOUNGER THAN EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. HB1908 Long TO CREATE THE PROOF OF RESIDENCY FOR PUBLIC ASSISTANCE…”
|
TO CREATE THE PROOF OF RESIDENCY FOR PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ACT; TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1909
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CE; AND TO REQUIRE PROOF OF RESIDENCY FOR ADULT APPLICANTS. HB1909 Long TO CREATE THE PUBLIC SERVICES ONLY FOR CITIZENS ACT; A…”
|
TO CREATE THE PUBLIC SERVICES ONLY FOR CITIZENS ACT; AND TO REQUIRE VERIFICATION OF CITIZENSHIP … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1915
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1915 Eubanks TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO REQUE…”
|
TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO REQUEST A BROAD-BASED CATEGORICAL ELIGIBILITY WAIVER FOR … | Eubanks | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1961
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1961 Achor TO ALLOW MEDICAL PROVIDERS TEMPORARY EXEMPTIONS FROM…”
|
TO ALLOW MEDICAL PROVIDERS TEMPORARY EXEMPTIONS FROM FEDERAL INFORMATION-BLOCKING REGULATIONS TO SAFEGUARD PATIENTS DURING INFORMATION … | Achor | Delivered to the Secretary of State |
|
HB1987
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1987 Ennett TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE STATE BOARD OF EMBAL…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE STATE BOARD OF EMBALMERS, FUNERAL DIRECTORS, CEMETERIES, AND BURIAL … | Ennett | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB117
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…DURING INFORMATION DISCLOSURE; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. SB117 C. Penzo TO CREATE THE NATUROPATHIC PHYSICIAN PRACTICE ACT;…”
|
TO CREATE THE NATUROPATHIC PHYSICIAN PRACTICE ACT; TO PROVIDE FOR LICENSURE OF NATUROPATHIC PHYSICIANS IN … | C. Penzo | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB120
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB120 C. Penzo TO REQUIRE LICENSURE FOR ALL PRIVATE CARE AGENCIES…”
|
TO REQUIRE LICENSURE FOR ALL PRIVATE CARE AGENCIES IN THIS STATE; AND TO ENSURE CONSUMER … | C. Penzo | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB168
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST MATERIALS OR TEST DATA. SB168 Rice TO ESTABLISH A STATE EXAMINATION FOR LICENSURE OF MASS…”
|
TO ESTABLISH A STATE EXAMINATION FOR LICENSURE OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS. | Rice | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB187
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB187 Irvin TO AMEND THE COMPOSITION OF THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID DRU…”
|
TO AMEND THE COMPOSITION OF THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID DRUG UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD TO INCLUDE PHYSICIAN … | Irvin | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB238
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB238 J. Payton TO AMEND THE USED TIRE RECYCLING AND ACCOUNTABILI…”
|
TO AMEND THE USED TIRE RECYCLING AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT. | J. Payton | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB347
Act 1025
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TO ENSURE CONSUMER PROTECTION FOR VULNERABLE AGING ADULTS. SB347 C. Penzo TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO INCREA…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO INCREASE REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR CERTAIN DENTAL SERVICES AND … | C. Penzo | Notification that SB347 is now Act 1025 |
|
SB444
Act 970
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB444 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE MEDICAL ETHICS AND DIVERSITY ACT.”
|
TO AMEND THE MEDICAL ETHICS AND DIVERSITY ACT. | K. Hammer | Notification that SB444 is now Act 970 |
|
SB497
Act 655
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB497 D. Wallace TO REQUIRE THE CREATION OF A POSTER REGARDING VE…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE CREATION OF A POSTER REGARDING VETERANS' BENEFITS AND SERVICES; AND TO REQUIRE … | D. Wallace | Notification that SB497 is now Act 655 |
|
SB534
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB534 G. Leding TO ESTABLISH THE ARKANSAS KRATOM CONSUMER PROTECT…”
|
TO ESTABLISH THE ARKANSAS KRATOM CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT; AND TO REMOVE MITRAGYNINE AND 7-HYDROXYMITRAGYNINE, ALSO … | G. Leding | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB546
Act 935
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…PLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS SERVICES FOR CERTAIN BENEFICIARIES. SB546 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE TRUST FUND CONTRI…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE TRUST FUND CONTRIBUTION FEE FOR WATER PERMITS RELATED TO … | K. Hammer | Notification that SB546 is now Act 935 |
|
SB554
Act 1022
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TS RELATED TO NONMUNICIPAL DOMESTIC SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS. SB554 C. Tucker TO CREATE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LOAN FORGIVENESS…”
|
TO CREATE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM. | C. Tucker | Notification that SB554 is now Act 1022 |
|
SB560
Act 740
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB560 J. English TO DECREASE THE BASE CONTRIBUTION RATE; TO INCRE…”
|
TO DECREASE THE BASE CONTRIBUTION RATE; TO INCREASE THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT RATE; TO INCREASE FUNDING … | J. English | Notification that SB560 is now Act 740 |
|
SB576
Act 623
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB576 B. Davis TO AMEND THE COVERAGE OF CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITO…”
|
TO AMEND THE COVERAGE OF CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITORS WITHIN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM. | B. Davis | Notification that SB576 is now Act 623 |
|
SB601
Act 971
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB601 Hester TO CREATE A PATHWAY FOR A GRADUATE OF A FOREIGN MEDI…”
|
TO CREATE A PATHWAY FOR A GRADUATE OF A FOREIGN MEDICAL SCHOOL TO BE LICENSED … | Hester | Notification that SB601 is now Act 971 |
|
HB1401
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1401 Pilkington TO INCLUDE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY SERVICES WIT…”
|
TO INCLUDE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY SERVICES WITHIN THE MEDICAID PROVIDER-LED ORGANIZED CARE ACT. | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1463
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1463 Hudson TO PROHIBIT DISCLOSURE OF NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL OR PSYC…”
|
TO PROHIBIT DISCLOSURE OF NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST MATERIALS OR TEST DATA. | Hudson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1718
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1718 Gramlich TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR SURGICAL SMOKE EVACUATI…”
|
TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR SURGICAL SMOKE EVACUATION IN HEALTHCARE FACILITIES LICENSED IN THIS STATE. | Gramlich | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1816
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1816 L. Johnson TO PROHIBIT HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS AND HEALTHCARE…”
|
TO PROHIBIT HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS AND HEALTHCARE INSURERS FROM USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE DELIVERY OF … | L. Johnson | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1888
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1888 Steele TO AMEND THE DIVISION OF WORKFORCE SERVICES LAW; AND…”
|
TO AMEND THE DIVISION OF WORKFORCE SERVICES LAW; AND TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT RECORDS … | Steele | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB473
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB473 Stone TO AMEND THE DUTIES OF THE ARKANSAS FIRE PROTECTION S…”
|
TO AMEND THE DUTIES OF THE ARKANSAS FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES BOARD; AND TO PROVIDE FOR … | Stone | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB507
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB507 G. Leding TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO COVER…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO COVER APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS SERVICES FOR CERTAIN BENEFICIARIES. | G. Leding | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
0:17
I believe you have an amendment to concur in? Yes, Mr. Chair, thank you, Representative Bruce Cozart, uh, House District 91, Garland County. I have a concur in that we put on in the Senate end. I just need to concur in that. Basically what this amendment does, it just takes a, um, was brought to us by the Attorney General. It just takes the the deceptive practice of trade protection. Let me get my glasses on. I can tell you exactly what it says. It's this does not, what we put in there would not apply to anything
actually brought by the attorney general for civil civil enforcement are deceptive trade practices. That's what they asked us to put in that bill, so we forgot it originally, put it back in. Appreciate
a good vote. Any questions by the committee? See knowing what's the will of the committee? Motion to concur. Motion concurry any discussion on the motion. See none, all those in favor say aye, opposed. Congratulations, sir, you concurred in your amendment.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you committee. Representative Pilkington, are you ready to run House Bill 1332? All right, we'll pass out the amendment of staff. We'll get that passed out. We'll give members a chance to look at that. Members, there's also a physical impact of this bill that'll be passed out for you to review as
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:44
well. Do you want me to go ahead and explain the amendment while they're passing it out, that'd be easier.
You can, then we'll give, uh, we'll give members a chance to look at
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:54
that and ask questions morning everyone, Representative Aaron Pilkington, District 45, Johnson to Pope County, uh, this bill we already heard before, but there's an amendment after listening to some, some of the concerns we completely took Medicaid out of it, uh, as I mentioned in my presentation, we were waiting on a federal rule and had that as part of the trigger, but uh actually they've ruled that they do no longer want the rules. So we took that completely out, we took the Medicaid part out, and then now basically this amendment does. Three things we're changing the
title to better reflect what the bill does. Uh, we're allowing, uh, we're requiring DHS to track obesity-related uh issues and costs so that we have a better understanding as we try to tackle the obesity issue here in Arkansas, how effective these drugs have been and have not been, and then the um The 3rd thing is that we require uh uh insurance companies to cover GPL1s, but yet we allow them to set the standards of which they authorize the medication, so it lets them have those guardrails so that uh you
know, they're not being forced to, it's not a, it's not a forced mandate on them that they've got to have these without some sort of ways to make sure that they're actually being used for the proper uh treatment of weight loss and not just being prescribed willy-nilly. That's essentially what the amendment does and that's essentially what the bill is now. It's been a complete rewrite, so. Um, but I'll, and so I don't know if that fiscal impact is necessarily accurate since so much has changed in the bill, but um. And I just pause for a second and let people kind of read over everything and if there's any questions, I'd be happy to
answer them. Members, we're going to give you a minute to look over the amendment, and then we'll start to take questions.
All members, you've had time to review the amendment. Any
Speaker 17
4:18
questions on the amendment? CNN Representative Pilkington. I motion to adopt the amendment. That's on the motion. See none.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Congratulations, you've adopted your amendment. You're recognized to present your bill as amended. Thank you,
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
4:32
Chairman. Essentially, like I said, the amendment is the bill now, so I'm, I'm closed for my um for my bill and make a motion to pass by the committee?
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
4:42
Representative Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Pilkerton, thank you for bringing this bill. I have a question regarding uh Medicaid. So now Medicaid is uh completely extracted out of the bill. Is that true? Yes, sir. Yes. So it's not in there at all,
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
5:03
but we are having DHS track the use of this medication so that it will help us inform decisions down the line when it when it comes to potential coverage of
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
5:14
the future. OK. So, follow up. So now this is just gonna impact private insurance, correct?
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
5:20
Yes, sir, but they're allowed to make uh basically their authorization parameters, whether or not, so it's not like a willy nilly they have to give this out of it's ass for and it's they can, but they need a set just like anything, like a normal medication, they're going to say, well, it has to meet these criteria for it, but they can't just arbitrarily say we're not, we're not using GPL ones for weight loss. OK, thank you.
Any additional questions by the committee. See none, you reckon that's
closed, Representative. I'm closed and make a motion to pass. That's motion. Any discussion on the motion? See none. All those in favor say aye, opposed. Congratulations, you passed your bill. Thank
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
6:02
you. Thank you. Do you want me, since I'm down here, you want me to do
Senate Bill 9. Uh We're here in house bills today. Um, are you prepared to run House Bill
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
6:12
1882. Uh, yes, I am. Wait, hold on, hold on. No, no,
I'm not running 1882. That's the, uh, that's the past one, correct? Sorry, I don't
have it in front of me I just have notes. OK. Do you have a house bill
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
6:25
you're prepared to run in addition to what you just ran? Can I make a motion to take um I believe it is HB 1270 off deferred. OK, we'll take that
motion, that without objection, we'll take the motion to uh move that off deferred, uh, just so the
membership is aware that we'll take a 2/3 vote. That's proper motion, any discussion on the motion? See none all those in favor, say I. With unanimous support, it's passed. Thank you. Can I bring someone up here to help me present the they're recognized. Thank you.
In days or so. Representative, if you will, identify yourself for the record, have your guests identify themselves for the record and anyone that they represent and uh you're recognized to present. I believe this has
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
7:32
a fiscal impact as well. Yeah, yes, it does, I believe so. What's the bill number? It is 1270 to establish a prescribed pediatric extended care pilot program through a section 1115 Medicaid waiver. House
Bill 1270 if you pass fiscal impact out. You're recognized to present. Thank you, thank you. Representative
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
7:49
Aaron Pilkington, District 45, Johnson to Pope. County. Yes,
Speaker 40
7:53
Michael Clinton, St. Joe, Arkansas. I'm here with my partners, Bobby and Suzanne Smith, uh representing Pedia Health. That's good. OK. Uh, yes, uh, with this particular bill, one of the focuses you may hear, uh, or have already heard with this bill that a few things that may be happening. One, that it would require us to cover all children that are on Medicaid in the state of Arkansas, which too
obviously would be too expensive, uh, and the last one that you will hear or have heard that we already have a program in place called EIDT, which is early intervention. day treatment that provides the same type of services that we would provide and those that we will be able to prove through this 11:15 waiver to demonstrate that that is not the case, that they are not parallel services that our services are distinctly different from an EIDT.
And in discussion with that, a few goals that we're looking to have with this waiver. One is to provide better care to medically fragile children in the areas that we would have, and 2, to be able to provide cost savings that is required within the waiver to be budget neutral through reducing visits to hospitals, ERs, uh, specialists because within a PPEC program that prescribe pediatric extended care, we are required to have RNs on staff at
all time, so in essence we're more considered of a skilled nursing facility. As discussed right now, the existing program EIDT that is in place. It is primarily focused on therapy based uh for developmental delays and needs. They also have the ability to provide nursing services, but that is not the primary focus there, where with the PPEC, the prescribed pediatric extended care, our focus is on managing care for medically fragile
children. We also will have the ability with a per diem that We can provide a therapy-based programs too through OT, PT, that would be similar to EIDT. Currently, PPEs are operating some states have a different acronym, but operating in 15 states, uh, right now the states around us that are near us, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi currently have PPEC programs in place and our point to to bring is if we continually are adding new states and these other
states are continuing to operate them if they were to be too expensive or require too many children to be involved. I don't think that they would continue to the those particular programs. Again, as I mentioned earlier with the PPEC, we always will require an RN to be on staff. In essence, when you look at the overall as a class would grow, you're looking at approximately a 3 to 1 ratio. Uh, again, these are medically fragile children that can require various
services and so we make sure that we would have enough staff there to take care of those particular needs. And last, just to bring up again to bring up the EIDT and a PPEC to cross reference the two. Again, EIDT is currently in place in the state of Arkansas, but primarily focuses on therapy based uh for developmental needs where we as a PPEC are focused on the medically fragile children and more on their services, but we also do offer, uh, developmental needs through therapy basis also.
And if there's any other questions, any questions, I would like to answer those
at this point. So I haven't read this bill until just now, and I'm kind of slow, so I probably need to read it 5 or 6 times. But if I understand right
here on the first page it says operating in 3 counties. What, what are those three counties that you prospect to operate
Speaker 40
11:47
in. Again, we, we're making an assumption on our end. We were looking at potential, you know, Pulaski County, Jefferson County, possibly somewhere up in the northeast, but that is where if this were to pass, we would
work hand in hand with DHS and also their children's special services counties did you
would that you would like to see it be are does the bill let DHS determine those counties because I, I, yes, yes, and
Speaker 47
12:09
that that's where I would go. We would work with them. We would just look
at the bill does it determine the three counties or lay out the determination. During the implementation phase
Speaker 29
12:22
does it lay that out? It, it doesn't. It just
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
12:25
says the pilot program should operate in 3 counties strategically selected in the most densely
populated counties of the state as determined by the department. So we're letting DHS determine what that is and giving them a little extra leash um on where that would want to be. So if they wanted to do bit and Pulaski, Jefferson or Craighead Pulaski, Miller, you know, they could, they could make that but that'd be within their own department where the need was the greatest. So didn't think they need to put that in statute so we didn't tie DHS's hands. OK. Questions from committee.
We're gonna get them to do. Any other questions from the committee? CN9 Miss Janet Mann,
can you come to the table, please? And Melissa, Melissa Weatherton. My favorite part of the committee. So I'm not sure if you guys have an opening statement or if you just want to go to questions or how you want to do that, I'll leave it up to the department. Um, I believe I'll start if that's all right with the
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
13:33
committee. Janet Man, DHS. OK, that doesn't work. Um, overall, the Medicaid program is opposed to this bill. Thank you. I opposed to this bill as it is a duplicative service and it is an expansion of our budget,
Speaker 133
13:49
and I'm gonna allow Miss Weatherton to give the details. Melissa Weatherton, director, Medicaid specialty populations, um, this exact bill ran in 2023. Um, we met, um, back then with the company out of Louisiana and explained our opposition to the
bill. We oppose this bill last session as well. Um, the program itself has a very wide category of what children would qualify, so we disagree with the um earlier testimony. We do think this has the potential to be able to accept the majority of children receiving or on Medicaid under the um diagnosis of failure to thrive. The diagnoses that are in this bill are very expansive. So we disagree with what um the testimony was earlier, and
again, we'd already have, we're one of the only states in the nation that has an early intervention day treatment program. We spend a lot of money on that program, um, annually about $250 million gone up. That was 23 numbers. 275 million annually. So we've also, we're one of the only states that continue to have pediatric ICFs, which is 24 hour facilities for children with high physical and mental health and intellectual
disability needs. So in both EIDT programs and ICF programs have a moratorium on them. So, um, it appears that this bill is also a way to get around a moratorium that we have been that we've had in place under state statute for a very long time. Representative Perry, he recognized
Chair
Unverified
15:31
for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
15:37
So I'm looking at the fiscal impact on this and On a Utilization at 10,000. The state share would be $315 million. If we went to a full 50,000 utilization we're talking $1.58 billion. Is that in our budget? No, sir,
Speaker 69
15:53
it's not in our budget, and that fiscal impact
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
15:59
was based on the the way the bill was originally filed. We have not had the opportunity to update it
on the proposed amendment with the pilot project, but as Miss Weatherton testified earlier with, um, wide open diagnosis codes. There is the fear that it could grow. Thank you. If uh Representative Grahamlin should recognize. Thank you very much. um, how many kids
Speaker 76
16:31
in the state of Arkansas will end up qualifying for this program?
Speaker 133
16:39
When we ran the numbers in 2023, um, based on diagnosis codes, um, it looked like 138,000 potentially. My chair's leaking down, so I look like a Really small
guy up here today. Any other questions from the committee?
on anyone else in the audience speak for or against the bill?
Uh Represent Pilton, y'all have somebody trying to get to the
table. If you would, ma'am, introduce yourself for the record and you recognized, I'm guessing you're speaking 4? Yes,
Speaker 85
17:31
sir. My name is Suzanne Smith. I'm a registered nurse, um, I have been, I'm also a child life specialist and have been involved in the care for
children for over 30 years. My husband and I own one of these centers in Louisiana and have run it for 30 years. I can tell you that the state of Louisiana has never cut back on this program because it has been successful in cutting cost. cost in cutting medical expenses. Um, there's About 650 children in the entire state of Louisiana and all 16 of our centers, so the 138,000, I'm not really sure where that number comes from, but it
doesn't seem remotely correct. It's not that way in Florida. It's not that way in Mississippi. It's not that way in Louisiana, and it's not that way in Texas and by way of putting a little bit of a personal note on this. I have a child who came from Arkansas. He's um um um Arkansas Children's. baby and has spent the better part of his life involved in Arkansas children with all of his various medical needs and it's a sliver, this group of children that Pex take care of
is a sliver that they're out there, they exist, they're born every day, and there's nothing out there to take care of them, but this child has seizures, has eating issues, has feeding issues, has heart issues and the Arkansas Children's in fact recommended an EIDT for this child and the EIDT that was close to where this mom lived, specifically stated that they did not accept medically fragile children. In fact, they did not accept
children that needed medication during center hours. So this mom moved to Louisiana and we were able to get this child on Louisiana Medicaid, get this child approved. Mom has been able to return to work as has Dad because now they've got registered nurses that are taking care of his needs every day, um, as an example, a week or so ago this child had a seizure while he was in therapy in my my center. We were able to get a video of it and send it to his pediatric neurologist. It's
saved on an ER visit. has saved on a hospital I'd met it saved on a neuro visit. They called us and said this is what we want you to do. We want you to draw some labs on this kid, and we want to see what's going on and then send them to us, so we cut across the swath and are able to save money, so this is a real life picture of what this program does and it had there been a PPEC in Arkansas, this child would have benefited from
that, but EIDT was Not going to be what was going to work for this child. Any questions for the witness?
See you no. Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else in the audience
speak for or against the bill? Seeing no one represented Pilkington, would you like to close for your bill? Yes, I would, one thing I'd just like
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
20:44
to highlight, if you look on, uh, believe it's page 3. It says the department determines the pilot program does not mean it's intended goals, the department may submit a request to Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services to modify or terminate the waiver before the scheduled expiration date. So the pilot program's not going as we think it's going, it's not saving money like we intended to do. We can terminate the program, um, and so that I close and I make a motion to pass. Yes. That's a proper motion. Any discussion on the motion?
CNN all as a favor, say ah. All opposed. Sorry to tell you your bill has failed. All members, uh, we'll move to Representative Woolridge. I believe it's house
bill at 1982. Yes, sir, Mr. Chair. That's the year you were born, right? Uh, no, I wasn't
alive in 1982, but I appreciate that. I'd like to ask for
the department to join me at the table and also the uh president
Unknown speaker
21:49
of the county Judges Association with your permission, sir.
Jeremy Wooldridge State Representative District one. Identify
yourself. You're recognized and just have your witnesses introduce ourselves. Will do, sir. Shane Corey, secretary for the Arkansas Department of
Speaker 97
22:38
Energy and Environment. Bailey Taylor, DEQ director and chief administrator
Speaker 98
22:42
of Environment. Rusty McMillan, Greene County Judge, president of County Judges Association. Members, Mr.
Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to bring this bill today. House Bill 1982 is a bill that I think that we probably have been working on
for a long time and, and it's been a long process to get here. I know I've been in the legislature now, uh, starting my second term, and we have talked about tires uh through the entirety of my service in the legislature. I know uh the person whose place I took, I visited with him about this bill, and he said that he had talked about tires uh through the entirety of his service in the leg. legislature, which is about 14 years prior to me. So this is not a new problem to the state of Arkansas, but very much a solvable problem, uh, in my
opinion. So when we look about, uh, when we look at tires and the problem that's being generated by tires, tires are not the only usable product on a vehicle, um, you know, vehicles have batteries, they have all, they have all of these other Uh, components that are being used and recycled and renewed. The only difference that I can see with tires is for some reason the state of Arkansas is in the tire business. We're not in the battery business. We're not in the business of uh repurposing oil or other things, those are all privatized, but for some reason, we have
continued to be in the tire business. So under current law, my understanding of the current law and the professionals and that are here at the table can speak to this greater than I can. I would suggest to you that we have privatized the tire business in Arkansas to some extent, but we've almost created the monopoly. Uh, we've put this into 4 tire districts, uh, the way it stands currently, anyone can apply for a permit to process tires, but that permit has to be approved by the tire district. So in essence, if I
wanted to start and operate a tire processor, I have to go to the tire district. I have to make application, and then they have to approve for me to be in competition with them. Um, that to me sounds like a monopolized market. All I'm asking you to do with this bill is allow us to uh allow for competition and allow for a better product for our Arkansans, with that, I'll recognize the secretary and the judge to make some additional comments. Thank you. So I think uh
Speaker 101
25:01
Representative Woolridge is correct, but I think we need to start with the, with the problem. The problem is the current tire system is broken. And this, excuse me, this solution is the only one that exists out there that solves the problem by not increasing a state fee. In fact, it actually reduces the state fee. It also limits government involvement in a private business where it doesn't need to be and it eliminates the existing tire district monopolies, thereby allowing a greater reuse or use beneficial use of waste hier
products. So not only does it reduce the current $3 fee to what is $1 50s moving forward with a further Option of reducing it down to 75 cents. It does allow a system whereby we think that new Corps and liberty and all the other existing tire processors processors can operate in a privatized way in a way that allows the free market system to move forward. I say the current system is broken, and let me explain why it's broken because right now the state collects a $3 fee, and of that $3 fee, and this was based on a legislative
audit, so these numbers are out there that $3 fee, um, we have basically. The most we have to reimburse after everybody takes their pieces, $2.57 a tire. That is also with the agreement we made two years ago to not do any abatement because we have no money for abatement and also cutting basically the administrative fee that the agencies was taking in half. So the most we can pay back per tire is 257. Right now we are reimbursing districts at a rate
of an average of $2.85 among the four districts. So obviously we can't sustain the system where we're reimbursing. $2.85 on average and collecting $2.50 on average. It will never work. Therefore, we are going to either have to continually subsidize this program or find a better solution, and we believe that this is a better solution that allows for beneficial reuse. Also, I have to give credit to New Corn and others beneficial reuse wasn't an option 4 years ago, 6 years ago, not even really 2 years ago, but now we
know that there is a beneficial use of those products, not only with New Corp but others, and I think there are people here to testify about that today, and I'll let Bailey kind of walk through the specifics of this program, if you don't mind, and
I'd like to add on. What the Secretary mentioned there, New Corps has been a partner with the state of Arkansas, uh, for a long time now. They're, they're looking at or they have looked at over $3 billion in investment into the state of Arkansas. Obviously a huge industry for us, and they have been a partner that has come to the table time and time again to help us solve this
issue. I know that they've, they've put $4 million roughly in retool and in reinvestment to be able to utilize this product in a way that's beneficial to the state of Arkansas, so I am. Grateful for their willingness to to come partner with us on this, Bailey. Certainly,
Speaker 103
27:51
in just a few more details. This bill maintains status quo with respect to our permitting authority for processors, our licener of transporters and our permitting for collection centers so that oversight, the compliance, the
enforcement mechanism is still there. Um, what this does is just changes the um regulation from the entire districts and the oversight, the solid waste management districts are still in place. They still have the authority over that so. waste and um tire retailers, many of them are already being charged the cost of transport, but they legally cannot charge pass that cost along to the to the customer or show it in any way on receipts, and so this
allows them to do that and recoup that cost as they're already being charged. And that's, that's part of
the, the beauty and what solves this problem. Again, you know, it allows a retailer to charge that fee so they can work with a private individual, they can work with a company, they can work with whoever they want to work with to process these tires, and they get to add that fee on to the price of the tires so they get to set and solve that problem. They take the state out of the equation, but as we all know with free market and everything else and
competition, if they try to charge an absorbitant amount in addition to what Um, is being processed down the street by their competitors, they won't be in business. No one will do business with them. That will force, we believe this to be a reasonable and manageable fee associated with the cost of processing tires where under the current system, it is just a A flat fee where we are increasing that every legislative session because we understand that there's no uh that we're not funding this program adequately currently, so
there's no mechanism that could drive the price down only up. Judge, do you have something you'd like
Speaker 98
29:47
to add? Sorry about that. Yes, um, This is something I've been in office for 10 years and even judges prior to me talked about tire problems that existed years that they had been in office, and we still have a few long current long timers and, and still remember uh 20 plus years ago and the challenges with
waist tires. Uh, I'd like this bill, uh, one, I think our current system and is, is like a bad relationship. We don't know how to get out of it. Sometimes you need to cut ties and um so I think that That's the the direction that we need to be in because we're not talking about ponds of oil or or um piles of waste batteries that exist and I think we would have done something about those in abating them and cleaning them up, but yet we still have large uh illegal waste dumps of tires that have not even begun to be
cleaned up in the 10 years that I've been in office. Uh, you'll probably hear from some that say that, well, county judges supported Senator Payton's bill, a similar bill. 2 years ago, all 75 of us. And we did, but I would argue that we have challenges um I remember in 17 a bill that was ran by Representative Fight and 2 years, I'm, I'm starting my 3rd year in office in 2017 and not understanding completely what it is to be county judge yet and so now I'm trying to figure out what I need to know about
landfills and waste tires, and through the process, uh, coming to now begin to kind of research on my own. And so here are some of the, uh, some information I'd like. you to know through my research, there's a company that is a local company has tire businesses in Perigold and Jonesboro, and then, uh, Greene County is right up against the boot hill of Missouri, so Missouri is the border of us on Greene County on the east side. He also has businesses in Pauper Bluff as well, which is north of
us in Missouri, um, one of his dealerships here in Arkansas, he hires somebody to dispose of his tires at $2.50 per tire, and I have an invoice from that particular company. Another company that he has up near St. Louis, Missouri, uh, someone hauled tires off and he paid them $1.50 per tire. And so we see that there's a discrepancy there with what maybe they're able to do in some places in Missouri versus here in Arkansas. He said it's pretty standard for his locations in
Missouri, be it up in St. Louis or those locations that are within 30 to 60 miles of Perold, Arkansas, uh, to charge $5 for a disposal fee. So with the 50 cents that Missouri has for retail sale that's remitted to the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, we see that charge being about $5.50 pretty standard for, according to this gentleman. So I began to look at some of our locations, uh, other, other locations in Arkansas. I spoke
with a a tire shop that's within 50 miles of Little Rock where the county population of less than 8000, and there's the $33 rim removal fee, but this company is also charging $4.50 for a car or light truck or $6 per large truck. To take care of the cost it takes them, with manpower or uh hiring someone to dispose of that those tires, and when he sends somebody to offload the tires that they have on a smaller trailer. He has 3 employees that have to go, so
one's offloading his trailer, one's standing at the back of the trailer, 53 ft long trailer, and he's rolling them to the guy that's in the front of that trailer and they're stacking them in there. Um Spoke with another company within 50 miles of Little Rock population of less than 80,000, the $3 rim removal fee is there as well, but charges an additional $3 for a car and light duty again, he can't eat the cost of disposal for every single tire, so we're seeing that there are, uh, additional
rem uh additional cost to the disposal and that those companies cannot eat that cost. Uh, for comparison, there's a company in Northern Missouri borders Iowa, uh, small population, 1800 people in that county. Uh, this gentleman. Contracts with the tire recycler in Kansas roughly 2 hours away. And he contracts with them and it's on, they have 50 cents again for the per tire tire sale, but remit that he remits
to the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, and then he charges an additional $2 to $4 to take care of that cost for that company to come and get those tires to take them to the recycling place. So what I've discovered is that mine and your constituents, as we've kind of talked about in these meetings are paying the $3 rim removal fee along with an additional $3 to $6 in the state of Arkansas, not state, I mean this are ones that I've, I've spoken with. Not all of those, some of those may be within the cost of the sale of the tire.
And for that disposal amounting to 6 to $9 per waist hire. Whereas the examples that I've given you from Missouri, the 50 cents on the retail sale and then $5 for disposal fee charged by many of the locations that I've researched, and that's $5.50 per waist time, so it's a cheaper cost. In the state of Missouri for large counties as well as very small counties. Additionally, um, another company that's within 50 miles
of Little Rock has a trailer that they pay an additional $300 for, and he has to, he negotiates that straight with Davis, uh, rubber and he changes that trailer out about every other week when he fills one up, and that works for his business. Uh, because of mileage and the amount of time it takes to haul these tires similar company in Perigoul in Greene County. It was going to be an additional $700 per trailer trailer for
him, which he fills up about 1 per week or every week and a half. And so it was not cost effective for him to do that. There's two automobile automobile dealerships that are in Greene County that also have businesses 30 miles away in Missouri, and they have said that they do, it's easier for them to dispose of the waste tires from their tire changing shops in Missouri than it is for them in Arkansas. So Missouri Department of Natural Resources demonstrates
that since 1990 they've cleaned up 17.6 million scrap tire. in their state and still estimates 159,000 being out there that they know of and another maybe 500,000, uh, that they're unaware of. So they've had great success in abatement, and that's uh something that we've not been able to enjoy in the 10 years that I've been in office and getting a lot of these waste tire sites cleaned up. So with that, I'll close. Thank you, Judge, and, and thank you members, you know,
two more things that I want to hit on. I
think that it's important to realize that what we're currently doing is the $3 fee as we discussed earlier, we're this new bill moves that down to $1 50s by allowing the market to privatize and, and retailers and people that are going into business to process this, to set the feed that $1.50 goes straight into the trust fund, and that's used for monitoring, it's used for abatement, it's used for all of the things that we've currently been unable to do under the current model because we are spending every dollar that we generate, plus um trying to solve this issue. So uh with
that, I think that we will start to entertain questions. From the committee, if that's all right with the
chair. Any questions? Representative Richardson. Thank you, Mr.
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
37:37
Chair. Representative Woolridge on the, uh, I, I see that it's. It's getting rid of the used tire recycling fund and changing it to an abatement fund. Is there any money already in that recycling fund, and if so, how much is in it do you know? Yes, sir,
Speaker 97
37:52
there is money in there. That's where the $3 rim
removal fee goes and that's how we reimburse the districts. So the plan is that we will reimburse the districts, um, for this last quarter of 2025 in early 2026 for any tires that they collect and process at the end of the year and then that money would be transferred to the abatement fund, and Representative, I want to follow up on that.
That is the fund that we're currently operating out of. It continues to basically be a revolving fund. It doesn't have. Any additional money in it, everything that it generates goes to the districts for
disposal. Our hope is there's about $7 million out there in abatement needs right now. We're projecting under this new model that this is going to generate roughly around $3 million a year uh that can be put into this fee that can be used for that abatement. So we hope that while we know it may be a long road, it's the right road to head down. Thank you for the question. Any other members with questions.
Chair
Unverified
38:59
Representative Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I'm, I'm trying to
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
39:03
do some math here and trying to figure this out. We're charging $3 now. And it's not really enough money to. Provide for the needs, but we're gonna reduce the feed to $1.50. So how does that how does that make up the difference when we're reducing the fee and we still have a huge abatement issue. You know, you can drive around, you'll see stockpiles of tires. Where, where does the money come
from to pay? Well, we're hoping that competition is going to help to solve that issue, so I would, I would relate that back to the insurance business if you're the only person in town that, that's able to sell health insurance by law, you're probably going to have a higher premium as opposed to if there's 15 people in town that are able to sell that. That's the hope is that this dollar dollar $50 will go into that fund and that the market will dictate because of competition. and drive that cost down of what we're currently having to pay the tire districts now under the current system. So who's going to collect the
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
40:00
money? I mean, so you're collecting $1.50 if that doesn't cover the cost of the tire, then who will
pay the difference? I mean, they negotiate that with the consumer or the businesses the
retailer who sells the tire at the point of sale, they're going to contract with whoever they want to collect these tires and whatever processing facility they partner with to take them, so they're going to factor that into the product price and my point earlier was if they decide to charge $100 a tire and The guy down the street selling
tires charges 50 cents or $3.50 or 7 cents, people in town are probably gonna buy tires from the more reasonably priced, um, place. OK, so basically it's putting him back on the businesses privatizing it and letting the market dictate. Got it. OK,
thank you. Any other questions for committee? Seeing on anyone in the audience
be for or against the bill. Left. Yeah, I see him. If you guys can evacuate
down there, we'll let Mr. Douglas. At the end of
Speaker 119
41:23
the table. I'm a little reluctant, but Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Craig Douglas. I'm director of District 2, tire of district which covers 27 counties.
Speaker 121
41:33
In Arkansas. Uh, Robin Reid is here also, and she is the director of District 1. I just want to make a couple of points to to not belabor, but, uh, what is not being discussed, we believe at length is the impact on this bill to the consumer. And to rural counties, uh, there is no increase in, in the fee.
That is correct. However, our estimates in talking with other tire retailers around the state, particularly in our, our district is that the cost of the tire uh would go up as much as 15 to $20 per tire uh on any new sale to the consumer primarily because each individual uh tire retailer and collection center under this bill will have to negotiate a
contract, individual contract, excuse me, with uh tire haulers and processors. Those individual contracts, uh, the cost of which for the tire retailer and the collection centers will be passed on to the consumer, uh, the consumer will pay. The fee will not go up. But the consumer's cost of tires, uh, will definitely go up. Uh, as far as rural counties are concerned in this bill,
there is no guarantee that each county will be serviced and there's tires would be picked up. I would point out to the committee, uh, that under a so-called privatized bill that tire haulers and processors are going to follow the money. They're going to pick up tires and process tires where they can make a profit. If it costs the holler and the processor. Uh, more money to try to travel a longer distance to pick up
fewer tires, uh, simple math would tell you and common sense is they're simply not going to do it. Uh, under this bill also retailers currently under the current program are allowed to retain 5% of the $3 fee to cover administrative costs because they have to do manifests, they have to keep up with the tires. They have to submit manifest. to the districts and so to the state to be reimbursed. Under this bill, uh, the tire
retailers would only be able to retain 2% of a dollar 50 cents fee. The administrative cost is going to be the same. So you're penalizing the retailers, uh, as well. In terms of uh of a monopoly of the districts, these districts were set up last session, every district requested. uh I did request for proposals, uh, for uh tire processors, uh, our district received 2
proposals. One was from Liberty Tire, the other one was from Davis. Tyre, Liberty Tyre, who is, uh, which is represented here today, uh there RFP, their response to the proposal, uh, proposed 3 consolidated collection centers to service 27 counties. Everybody else in order to get their tires to the service centers, uh, were on their own in terms of cost. The cost goes up to the retailer because all
of the cost is passed on to the retailer. This bill hopes that the private market will reduce cost. We don't know. What we do know is that the current program that the disposal and the processing of tires throughout the state. The four districts collected and processed over 3 million waist tires last year. That would continue under the current law, uh, it would not continue under
this law because there is no guarantee that tires would be picked up, particularly in rural counties. the, the, the judge also The cost in Missouri, uh, we do know what the cost. We've looked at Missouri. We know what the hauling costs are and the processing costs are, we don't know what the tire cost purchase
prices, nor do we and nor can we govern the purchase price of the car of the tire, uh, in, uh, in uh this bill or in the current law. We can govern the fee and limit it. Uh, so the cost to the consumer is going up under this bill and the uh guarantee will be eliminated in terms of
To pick up tires in each of the 75 counties. This bill eliminates that. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Are you spitting on that thing down there? No, sir. I certainly hope not. We
ain't had anybody else break it until you got up there. Any questions for the committee? See you. Thank you for your testimony. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. Representative, you recognize clothes for your bill?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that. Thank you committee. I know that we've got a long day. I appreciate you hearing us, um, I, I understand why someone would be here to speak in opposition to that if they are one of the current tire districts, uh, the, the point that he made that I agree with is under the current law, we know that it's not working. We know that we're going to have to have a fee increase to make the current system work. There is hope that the private market will drive the price down. That's the whole point of this bill. It's to allow the private market to do what it's going to do. And uh with
mad, I'm closed and I'm making a motion to pass. That's
proper motion, the discussion on motion. Seeing on all his favor, say ah. I have it. We're a lot more efficient than the Senate committee. I
just want to let you all know. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Motion motion Representative Gram. You want to turn your microphone on
and get close enough to us so we can hear you. I'll get close enough to hear me. A motion to pull 1718 off deferred. That's proper motion without objection.
We'll pull that off deferred, seeing no objection, it's off. Patience patient. I know what
Speaker 131
48:29
I'm doing. Patience. Representative Graham, I sure hope you can present this in a hurry. They are, you know
Uh, thank you, Chair. Thank you committee. Um, I'm gonna ask a
Unknown speaker
48:52
couple of people to join me at the table, only if their comments are minimized. That's the goal. I I
Speaker 133
49:30
Zach Gramli State Representative District 50, Fort Smith. I say your
Speaker 76
49:34
name and here with. with your name. Tom is over. I'm Shelley Whittle, RN at
Speaker 140
49:40
the VA. Uh, hit your mind. Oh, hit your
Speaker 141
49:44
mic, hit your mic. TJ McKenzie, I'm an RN
Speaker 144
49:49
at the Central Arkansas Veterans Hospital. We're here on behalf of the ARRN chapter. Uh, thank you very much committee. Uh thank
Speaker 133
49:55
you for your time today to talk about a potential issue that we're having and some of our ORs
across the state, um. Long short, uh, there are these energy enemy devices that are used in surgery similar. I kind of like a light saber, they're very hot and they allow wounds and stuff to be cauterized and they're used during surgery, there are some concerns that this smoke is bad for the health of our OR nurses and OR surgeons, and there's an effort to get smoke evacuation equipment that when the cauterization at these spots happens that smoke is immediately evacuated, protecting the lungs and health
Speaker 78
50:31
of our OR nurses. And other people in the OR and with that, I'll let them add their comments.
Speaker 140
50:41
I'm an RN circulator originally from Missouri and transferred to Central Arkansas in 2023. I have been a nurse for 28 years with most
Speaker 145
50:47
of it in the OR. TJ and I are leading the campaign at the VA to mandate smoke evacuation on all cases with surgical smoke plume. Surgical smoke is a result of human tissue contact with lasers and cautery pencils commonly used for dissection and
hemostasis during surgery. In other words, it's the smoke from burning flesh. Surgical smoke is a health and safety hazard that impacts up. Operating room nurses, surgical technicians, surgeons, patients, anesthesia providers, and all others who passed through the doors of an operating room. An estimated 90% of surgical procedures generate surgical smoke. C-sections, mastectomies, and knee replacements all generate surgical smoke. Concerns over the cost of the equipment. Let's talk about the cost of losing health care staff
who decide not to work in this hazardous environment, especially since 18 states across the country have already taken steps to ensure that surgical smoke is safely evacuated from their operating rooms. OR nurses receive OR nurse training on the job. There is not an OR clinical OR. course in undergraduate nursing programs. The cost of this facility when that nurse is extra full-time employee in the operating room observing and learning on the job. Additionally, facilities will provide education and training opportunities to ensure that their staff are offering the
best care to their patients. And that is money out the door if the OR nurse decides to leave the facility once they realize that they are exposed to hazardous surgical smoke every day in the OR. In the room where they are saving lives that nurses should not be risking their own. Please vote yes on the House Bill 1718, so OR nurses in Arkansas can safely do their job and continue to care for patients. I Um, I am an, uh, an OR nurse and
Speaker 144
52:35
a scrub nurse here at the VA. I've been a nurse for 25 years and 24 of that has been in the operating room. I've also spent about 12 of that in the US military as an operating room nurse. Um, as healthcare workers, we take an oath to do no harm, yet in the OR we're often surrounded by surgical smoke that is associated with numerous health problems. We warn our patients and each other about the risk of cigarette smoke, yet one day in the operating room with these surgical smoker. devices is the equivalent of
smoking 27 to 30 unfiltered cigarettes. And the very real chronic and damaging physical effects of surgical smoke such as breathing problems, increased risk of lung cancer and headaches affect many of us who work in the OR. Patients who have laparoscopic ga gallbladder removal surgeries and if for those of you that don't know what that is, that's where they make portholes in your abdomen they put cameras in and surgical smoke generating devices so that when they burn things inside the abdomen, all the smoke is basically being absorbed by the
patient, so it's not only the healthcare workers that are at risk, it's also
Speaker 143
53:42
our patients. And um within this smoke that is generated in the abdomen, it is, it has been shown that it's up to
Speaker 144
53:49
10 times the amount of benzene, tooline, and xylene, which are known carcinogens, and this has been found in post-op urinalysis from our patients. Um, most surgical facilities in Arkansas already have surgical smoke evacuation equipment, and while many of these facilities may evacuate surgical smoke during some procedures, few
facilities evacuate consistently during all smoke generating procedures. Um, House Bill 1718 proposes a solution to a hazardous workplace issue faced by thousands of healthcare workers for decades. At a time when healthcare workers are experiencing burnout and leaving the profession, Arkansas can take an important step to protect the health. And the safety of OR staff and shore up the workforce, Arkansas residents rely on for their healthcare delivery. Please vote yes on House Bill 1718, which ensures that Arkansas health
facilities will utilize their equipment to protect the health and safety of OR staffs and our patients. Uh, thank you very
Speaker 141
54:46
much and we're open to any questions. Representative Long. Thank you,
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
54:54
Mr. Chairman. The I believe you all mentioned that you work at uh uh Veterans Hospital. We do. Would state law require the federal government to do this, so it's not going to fix your problem. Second question, this would apply to UAMS, is that correct?
Yes, since that involves taxpayer money and everything. I didn't see a fiscal impact. We're kind of getting down to the end where we're running out of money for all the different projects and I'd kind of like to see a fiscal impact on it. That's
proper request. Any objection to the request? Seeing no objection, Representative Gramlich, if you
can get us physical impact and come back Thursday. We'll see you on Thursday. Uh, we'll see how quickly they can work. Thank
Speaker 75
55:38
you very much, committee. Thank you. Thank you.
Unknown speaker
55:41
Yeah. Representative John Eubanks. not OK.
Representative Eubanks, I was not present Thursday, so I'm gonna let you run this show. If you would
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
56:23
introduce yourself a committee and you're recognized to present your bill. John Eubanks House District 46, uh, Mr. Chairman, on, on Thirsty, I believe where we ended up where we were on the the for and against, uh, portion of the, the meeting and that was where I was asked for a fiscal impact, and I believe DHS
has supplied the fiscal impact. Uh, they emailed it to me. Do the members have it? I believe the staff is passing that out. OK. If I remember correctly, the fiscal impact was $87,000. I believe DHS had ah testified
that they thought it would be minimal. I, I, I, I believe $87,000 is minimal. In fact, I, I do have I guess I have a question about that because we, we passed an emergency rule, I believe, Thursday that raised the asset level to $5500 for approximate that uh An individual could have for a year, so if they're going to be administering that, I'm trying to figure out how this increases what.
Might be the current administrative costs, but uh like I said, Mr. Chairman, we were in the for and against and I believe DHS had uh uh come to the table at that point and change their position from neutral to against. This is the year you were born,
1915, correct? Thank you. I had members asking, so I was trying to figure that out. I
Unknown speaker
58:13
aged well. So at this point, sir, Mr.
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
58:17
Chairman, uh, I don't know where we're at. I don't know if I'm closing or if you're still in the for and against uh
portion. Members are telling me they still have some questions they want to hear, so let's, let's honor those requests. If I can
get DHS to the table, that'd be great. Represent Richardson, you'll
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
58:49
recognize once Secretary Putton introduces herself for the record. Christy Putnam's secretary DHS. Your morning, Secretary Putnam, thank you for being here. Uh, so now that we've got the fiscal impact and we know what that is, have you guys now changed your position on where you
Speaker 166
59:07
stand on this? We have not, sir. We still believe it's in the best interests to implement the current rule that was just passed so that we can see what the impact of that is, um, it is difficult to, to estimate the number of people who may remain
Speaker 168
59:21
on extended period of time with an additional asset limit,
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
59:24
and if I recall when you were here last week about this. When did that rule pass? The rule passed
Speaker 170
59:32
um. Last Thursday, OK. OK, thank you. Any additional questions by
the committee. I do have one I'd like to hear your response to Representative Eubank's point, and I tend to agree with him that if that rule
changed and that raised the limit, there was going to be some additional administrative costs associated with that. So does this fiscal impact Include that, or is this from the old limit to the new limit. This is intended to include that
Speaker 166
1:00:04
we had to estimate some additional system changes. We don't know exactly what changes would need to be made to move the income limit, tie it to the cost of living increase, um, or I'm sorry, the inflation factor, um, and so those are all things that we would have to to make changes to within our eligibility system. Yes, sir. Do
we know what that fiscal impact was going to be just based on the rule change. Uh, I would have to
Speaker 166
1:00:27
get that for you. I don't have it. We've already made those system changes, so we do have a number that we could provide. OK. Any additional questions by the committee? You got a question? I'm gonna recognize you representing along.
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
1:00:53
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, I, I didn't get to be here the other day. I was in another committee when you, when y'all were presenting your bill so I went back and watched some of the video of it, and I, you know, at one point considered trying to do some sort of bill this year regarding the kind of the fiscal cliff that people end up with on the government assistance, um, but it seems like this bill basically it just moves the cliff. Down but doesn't do it sort of
in a stair step type manner like I was thinking about trying to do, um, can you, can you explain, you know, why you just did it that way instead of kind of reducing it or increasing that amount slowly while decreasing services, you know, kind of try to wean people off
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
1:01:41
the benefits. I was having a hard time. I was having a hard time hearing your representative Long, but the,
the purpose the bill was to, in my mind, allow people to accumulate
assets so that they could at one point. Get off of public assistance and that the increase Due to the inflationary factor was to increase that with each year as cost increase because we all know what food costs are doing. So, I, I, I, I guess I'm a little confused about what your question was as far as going down, uh. I want to move people off of
public assistance, and I believe in order to do that you have to give them an opportunity to do so. Uh, I know as an individual growing up, you know, I was able to accumulate something and because I was, I was also able to leverage what I accumulate to accumulate more and ah so I Like I said, the purpose of the bill is twofold. Number one, I do not want people to go hungry.
Number 2, I want to try to move people off of public assistance when possible and help them improve their situation. Seeing no further questions, we'll
move to the for and against. We have quite a few signed up. We have Nick Horton signed up to speak against the bill. You guys would if they We spoke last time. 00, now wait a minute, if you've already spoke, we're not gonna replow the ground. So you, that's not, we're not doing this again. So
Speaker 176
1:03:28
Nick Horton's already spoke, so he scratched. What about Nick's on the fiscal note. There wasn't a fiscal note on Thursday. Is that in the rules that I'm not
allowed to speak. If you've already spoke against the bill, you cannot speak again. Have you spoke against the bill?
It's a yes or no question. OK, then you're, you're not speaking at this point, Nick still, did he speak against the bill last time? Nick still is recognized to speak against the bill.
Nick Staley
Unverified
1:04:06
Alright. My name is Nick Staley. I'm a visiting fellow at
Speaker 182
1:04:09
FTA Action. And we're a think tank that works on reducing barriers to work and getting people out of government dependency. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I'm here to testify in opposition to HB 1915. And while I appreciate the good intent behind this bill and the desire to give Arkansans a hands up. A hand up. I'm afraid that it would instead trap more folks in dependency rather than providing them with the tools they need to become self-sufficient.
I think some historical context would be helpful. SB 306 was enacted in 2023. And DHS was given the ability to raise the income threshold well beyond federal standards and temporarily elevate the asset cap to $5500 for one full year, once every 5 years. I remind you that this is already more generous than the federal standard. In contrast, this bill permanently expands eligibility by raising the asset limit.
To double the asset limit established in federal law. For as long as enrollees are receiving benefits. In doing so, I want to remind you we're also, because we could say this is federal money, but we're also growing the federal deficit, which is at a crisis. So I would urge you all to uphold this principle of temporary targeted assistance and opposed this broad and permanent expansion in food stamp eligibility. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions for the witness?
See no questions. Thank you for your, oh, sorry, Representative Pilkington, you recognize. Thank
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:05:47
you, Chair. Uh, Nick. When I was in grad school, I worked in section 8 housing, and I would constantly see this where people would They'd have section housing, they would get a job, they're working, they're doing everything we want to do, and then unfortunately though, they would get a promotion and they
potentially would lose their housing, um, and so they wouldn't take the promotion, they wouldn't take more work, um, my understanding is that this bill will just allow them
to increase those assets so they wouldn't be burdened by losing certain benefits if they increase their asset limits, but is it creating a cliff or is it creating an off lamp? Because I'm confused on that and, and I'm sorry maybe representing Eubank's addresses. I wasn't here. on Thursday, so I'm, I'm sorry, um, and maybe he can dress in his clothes too, but I'm just going through this. I'm, I like off ramps, I don't like cliffs. And so, um, it's kind of both of y'all, but it just popped in my head, so. So, so, uh,
Nick Staley
Unverified
1:06:44
The way I see this is what it's doing is it's moving that
Speaker 182
1:06:48
cliff into the future. And it seems like when you see bills like this and and others um they often do that same thing. And the fact of the matter is there's already transitional benefits in most welfare programs, um. And so as income increases, the benefit amounts ratchet down, and there are, I believe it's up to a year, I can't remember the name of the program, but there are already programs and food stamps to allow some of this,
and of course, uh we know that it was, I think I just testified it was uh 306, yeah, SP 306. And so uh we're already, I think as a state establishing um sort of that off-ramp, um, And so I think it's better to do that than to have this um just simply pushing out into the future this problem that already um that already exists. Um. And I, I think our calculation said it was somewhere between 7
and 11,000 people being added to food stamps because of this, so I think that's also worth
noting. Any further questions for committee? Seeing and all, thank you for your testimony. We do have a Kristen Harper, as she testified previously. OK. You're recognized to
testify for the bill. Good morning, Kristen Harper.
Speaker 191
1:08:17
I'm with Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, and I'm here to ask you to vote for HB 1915 so that we can provide critical access to food for low-income families by requesting a waiver to increase the state's asset limit to 6000, and importantly index it to inflation as well. As you may know, Arkansas has one of the highest food and security rates at 18.9% in 2023 compared to 13.5% nationally. Even more distressing is that food and Security among children is even
higher. In 2023, Feeding America reported that 25% of Arkansas children were food insecure. Food insecurity and hunger have long lasting cumulative and significant consequences on children and families. Arkansas is one of only 13 states that
Chair
Unverified
1:08:59
continues to have an asset limit, meaning a limit on how much a family can have in their bank account, the value of an additional vehicle, etc. And still have access to Snap. Most states have chosen to eliminate the asset limit, but Arkansas currently maintains the lowest asset limit possible.
Speaker 191
1:09:19
Most financial advisors are going to recommend that you have savings to cover 3 to 6 months of expenses, right? So Arkansas again with our asset limit of 3000 or 4500 for individuals with disabilities are those over 60, um, is much lower than that. For for most families, 3000 is not enough for one month of for even one month of expenses. Increasing the SNAP asset limit to 6000 across the board will help decrease hunger for children and families, while also allowing families to save
for emergencies and otherwise do just what we want families to do, right? To have this temporary safety net and then ultimately get off of transition off of benefits and not fall back into poverty. HB 1915 will help reduce hunger in our state, while also allowing families to build self-sufficiency,
Chair
Unverified
1:10:03
so I ask you to please vote for HB 1915. Thank you. Representative Rose, you recognize. Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you for your testimony today. Um
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:10:22
I went way back in history and remembered when I was 20 years old. Newly married In college and We weren't making much money, didn't have much money, and somebody suggested and this is a weird place in history for me. Somebody suggested that we apply for benefits like this, and we were turned down, I think at the time because we had maybe it was with $2500 in the bank or whatever, whatever the asset limit was at that time. And I remember it was frustrating.
And I realized, well, I had to do something, so I got a 2nd and then a 3rd job to cover all those needs as a family, uh, while being a full-time student and I'm just curious to your thoughts on um If we don't raise this asset limit. The alternatives for, for folks who are able to work as an alternative to
get a job or to get a second job or pick up uh some other kind of uh paying
contract labor or or whatever. Just kind of your thoughts on that because that, that, that's my personal experience. I'm
just curious what your experience would share. Sure, I think
Speaker 191
1:11:34
the answer is it depends, right? So many families, they have different circumstances. Some parents are full-time caregivers for children with disabilities and so may not be able to pick up that additional job is just one example. Um, so there a wide range, um, but again, Arkansas is one of the few states that still has an asset limit, and I think at the end of the day, this is going to help families and most importantly, children. Um, we know if
children are well fed, they're going to do better in school, both academically, behaviorally, um, and so I just think that this is the right thing to do for
kids and families. I'm recognized. Thank you. Um, I, I had a question for you and kind of to follow up on what Representative Rose was discussing. So my, my current understanding of This is so SNAP benefit is the maximum benefit of what, what, $300 a month, maybe $250 a month.
Speaker 191
1:12:28
It depends on the family size, but, but roughly, yes, you're looking at, um, on, on average about $6.60 a day. OK. So
my Now we're back. OK, I can't touch it. Um, so my, my question or my point to that would be and
and Representative Rose kind of got me thinking along this line. Do you believe that Arkansans are trying to impoverish themselves to continue to get a $300 a month benefit in perpetuity. I mean, I, I wouldn't, I don't know, that doesn't make sense to me. I don't understand why anyone would do that. And I think to Representative Eubank's point, um, we've talked about this, this fiscal cliff that's out there for people, and I agree that cliff exists, but I hope that by extending this, this asset limit, we're allowing
people to take an opportunity to continue to better themselves to his point earlier, so would you agree with that or, I would agree. Thank you. I turned off. Any further questions? Representative Richmond,
Chair
Unverified
1:13:45
do you have a question? OK, well, you flailed your hand. Um, thank you
for your testimony. Thank you. Anyone else in the audience speak for or against this bill?
Yes, ma'am. You have not testified previously,
Speaker 209
1:14:17
correct? Yeah. Thank you, a representative for bringing this bill, um, a couple of
Britney Um
Unverified
1:14:21
years ago you would state your name for the record and
Brittany Stockton
Unverified
1:14:25
you're to testify. My name is Brittany. um, and I am testifying in support of the bill, ma'am. Brittany Stockton. you. A couple years ago, um, my 3
daughters and I left a situation, um. And urge a situation for safety reasons. Um, I didn't have a job, I didn't have money saved, and I was eligible for benefits at that time. In the past two years, I've worked usually 2 jobs to take care of my girls. I'm no longer eligible for benefits, but at that time I was and I applied and I got everything that I was able to get. Had I had savings. We would have been better off, but I wouldn't have been eligible for the benefits that I
had. I wasn't planning to speak on this, but I felt like it was important to share that. Um Like I said, I have 2 jobs now. I support my girls, um, I don't qualify for benefits anymore, but that is an asset to people who are leaving under circumstances, um. That they didn't plan on, so please consider that and vote in support of this. Any questions for the witness? CNN, thank you for your
testimony. Representative Eubanks, no one else raised their hand, speak for or against the bill. Yes, ma'am. You are very welcome to. Good morning. Oh, right here. Good
Holly Skipper
Unverified
1:15:57
morning. Uh, my name is Holly Skipper. I had had no idea this was even a bill that was in
Speaker 215
1:16:08
committee, um, I wanted to share a little bit. I have recently become a full-time caregiver for myself. My son that is autistic and my husband who was in desperate need for a liver. About 3 months ago, I was advised by one of my proctors, I'm a full-time student. And I was advised that maybe I should go and try to apply for food stamps. So I thought, you know, there was only one other time in my life that I ever had to use that, and that was after my first husband passed away.
And I became a single parent to a newborn at 3 months old. Fast forward two decades later. Never thought I would ever have to use it. I always wanted to support those who needed it. When I started this process and I just got approved 3 days ago. I started this process in December of last year. Not, not only did I have to account for every dime that I was making in the two part-time jobs I had plus school plus my son's money.
But I spent days and days crying, wondering which job I was going to have to quit so that I could afford. To be able to feed my son. And feed my partner. So yes, when they mentioned when one of the representatives mentioned that people aren't just going out there to get $300 a month. We get $200. And $5 a month. That's after I pay. Everything that I have to pay and right now? I have $13 in my bank account.
I work 60 hours a week, including the hours that I go to school. I'm going to school for social work, I guarantee that I'm not. Spending the 3 months that I spent in the hours in tears wondering if I'm gonna which bills I have to give up to be able to feed my family for $200 and something dollars a month. So I plead. The reason I mentioned that is because of the asset limits. Because of the asset limits, we had to go back and I had to. Give things away or I wasn't allowed to give or sell things
away, but I had to I had to explain to them why I had a car to get my partner back and forth to UAMS that didn't have 1,007,000 miles on her 200,000 miles. So I guess my point is in rambling. Is that people aren't just out there trying to stay down. They're trying to get some help and we're trying to get a leg up so we can help other people. So thank you. Representative
Perry, ma'am, if you'll take questions. Representative
Speaker 216
1:18:43
Perry, I'm sorry guys, that was my first. I didn't have any intention of
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
1:18:47
doing this this morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you coming and testifying. You said you applied, you started the
application process in December of last year, yes sir, December
Holly Skipper
Unverified
1:18:57
3rd, and you gotta prove 3 days ago. Yes, sir.
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
1:19:00
So 4 months. Yes, sir. Yeah. That's, I understand. Thank you. Thank you. Representative Rose. Thank
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:19:12
you, Mr. Chair. Um, Ms. Skipper, so sorry for the challenges you're facing with
your family. Thank you. um, I want to say thank you for taking the time to come and testify. Did you say, and I was following and I got a little sidetracked and it wasn't your fault. Did you say you had to quit
Speaker 147
1:19:32
one of your jobs to get approved. I had to,
Speaker 215
1:19:34
I had to low, I had to. We had to lower my hours approximately 3. One hour a week. For me able to get approved. Yes, sir. So I had to take an extra, I had to take a lunch shift off of my week. OK.
Because my tips were too much. Pay for gas, yeah. All right,
thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Before I put my foot in my mouth again, is there anyone else in the audience to speak for or against this bill that has not previously spoke on this bill. CNN Representative Eubanks, you are recognized to close for your bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, members,
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
1:20:21
I don't like to see people game the system. I don't like to see people on the dole, anybody at home that knows me understands that they They know, uh, They know how I work and what I expect of other people. Uh I have supported the work requirement. For, for these benefits, I have, I think any able person, if, if they have one job and they're
not being able to make it, then I would agree with what Representative Rose said that possibly they ought to get a second job because I hadn't, when my oldest son was in college, I had to recommend that to him. Uh, it turned out well, but, you know, it's all right to sacrifice. It's all right to put in that time to do that, to try to improve your. situation. My daughter is a counselor at an elementary school in Western Arkansas, and I sort of know
firsthand the food insecurity that a lot of our young kids are dealing with. Uh, I also know what food costs are. Anybody here that has gone to the grocery store in the last 1 year and a half, 2 years, know how, how, how it's increased. You know, I don't know. I know what I'm spending. I don't know how other people are being able to afford to feed their families. I had an elderly gentleman
contact me after the meeting last week. And he left me a voicemail. And he said, I know you're not trying to expand the roles for this. You're just trying to feed people. He says, I haven't had to deal with this in a long time. But if you've ever had to go without groceries. You appreciate whatever help you can get. He says, I'm not in that situation now, but I appreciate what you're trying to do. Um,
Like I said, I, I don't want people to take advantage of a situation. I do not want to expand the roles unnecessarily. I want people to have an opportunity to improve themselves, and I don't know how you do that if you're not able to accumulate anything and by and by being one of the few states in the country that still has asset limits, you know. If what we've been doing worked. Why are we still in this same situation, so I would, I would
contend that we, we have to change some things, and with that, uh, Mr. Chair, I'm closed and I'd appreciate a good
vote. Thank you. What's the wishes of the
committee? I got a motion to pass. In discussion on the motion. Representative Bennett, you
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:23:17
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I am uh I apologize for being late. I was running several bills in other committees, um, I wanna thank Senator, not Senator, sorry, Representative Eubanks for bringing this bill. Um, I have a
son with disabilities and so we're already dealing with some of this, these issues with him now, um, so I want to thank you for bringing this to the table, and I hope that the committee will vote yes for this. Any
Chair
Unverified
1:23:48
further discussion? Representative Hindley, you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:23:53
Representative Eubanks. I'll be voting for this bill. I volunteer at a homeless shelter and food pantry in Hope,
and you know, these problems are real, and I believe that the Eubanks is right. It's not been working, what we've been doing hasn't been working. I think this is an opportunity to perhaps help people who need help. There are, there are several, uh, what we had state programs, um, these solutions grant, you may be aware of that. It's been moved from Department of Human Services over to the Department of Finance Authority, uh, grants had been in process for months now, and I don't believe those
agencies who have been depending on this money for years and years had been told that they're going to be able to help the homeless nor the, the people who are hungry. So we have some problems in this state, and I think that this is a uh method uh to correct a problem and to help. A situation. Thank you. Seeing no other discussion, all those in favor
say aye. I opposed. I just have it. Congratulations, your bill is passed.
Thank you committee. All right, Representative. next. Hall, is he still in the room? Yeah, Representative Hall, you recognize, present your bill. Can you give us the bill number? I 1762. too
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:25:34
Representative Brad Hall, uh, District 24. House Bill 1762. Representative Chad Perrier, I
Representative Chad Puryear
Unverified
1:25:41
just wanted to come see Representative Ward Law today and be moral support here. Yeah, your
name's on the list up here, so I don't believe that for a
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:25:53
second. But you guys are recognized. All right, thank you. Hey, uh, this is a constituent bill. Uh, what's happened is there was a uh company, uh, I guess you'd say uh statewide company and uh
they got Kicked out of Missouri and Oklahoma and, and what this bill deals with is uh chicken poultry, uh, processing waste, water, uh, because when, when they kill all the, the, the chickens and poultry, they have to have wash downs and so the water has to go somewhere every hour, so they can't let it back up, so they're constantly trucking it out of there. And uh when they got shut out of Missouri and Oklahoma, the only place they had to go to it was District 24, and uh, and it, it's a large, large amount.
of it. Uh, sometimes there's 200 and uh 87 semi truck loads going one way a day. And so they have open lagoons, uh, they're putting it on top of the ground and dising it in and, uh, and they're breaking their permit because they're having to and they're even self. Implying that they're breaking their permit and and uh so. have I think that pretty well covers. I don't have a whole lot to add.
Speaker 238
1:27:05
I figure we'll have some questions in committee. Yeah. And so
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:27:11
all this build says is that if you break your permit 3 times within a 45 day period, we revoke your permit, and that's, that's all it says. So. And those of you that are from the Fort Smith area that when you smell that smell, that is, that's, that's what it is. Any questions from committee. Representative Long, you
Chair
Unverified
1:27:28
recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What's the current fine? Uh, the fine is anywhere from
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:27:37
$1000 to $10,000 but that depends on the ADEQ whatever they want. And, and currently
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
1:27:42
it's to their advantage just to pay the fine and keep keep breaking the rules. Is that correct? Yeah, but
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:27:48
they're having to self. Uh, I guess tattle on themselves. Nobody's there to to catch on breaking the rules. Thanks, sir.
Speaker 245
1:27:54
Representative Rose. Motion at the proper time.
Any other questions from the committee? Anyone in the audience speak for or against the bill.
You want to hear? If you would introduce yourself for the record and you recognize I speak.
Speaker 97
1:28:24
I don't really know how you're speaking, so go ahead. You're speaking for or against? Again. OK. Um, Bailey Taylor, DEQ director,
Speaker 103
1:28:29
chief administrator of Environment. I do appreciate you representative for the conversations that we've had, um, but I, I do need to voice some concerns from the department. So first, this bill, um, adds a clause that is really inapplicable to that section in the solid waistcoat.
The permits that we issue for the land application of this waste. are
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:28:49
issued under the water section and so the section under the solid waste Management Act is just we won't be able to apply it to anything that we regulate and so we have that concern and then this also requires us to issue or deny a permit within 180 days, and while that is always our goal. There are certain things that can
Speaker 103
1:29:10
happen that would prevent us from doing so, um, such as extensive public comments, um,
if we had staff turnover during a season or. if the permittee does not supply us with all the information that we've requested and we are in the business of issuing sound protective and divincible permits. And so if all of those, if we don't have a perfect record, then we can't issue that and we would be required to deny that permit and so we're afraid that this would create a situation where we're having to deny permits and um. You know, these businesses would not be able to operate under those conditions. And then
lastly this um this bill, so we already have processes at DEQ in place to address noncompliance, and we're afraid that this bill um prescribes extra requirements on just one type of permit. And so we would be spending our time, uh, revoking and having public hearings on these specific permits for the specific type of violations instead of working through the and enforcement and permitting processes that are already in place.
Chair
Unverified
1:30:20
I'm available for questions if needed. Representative Richardson, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, ma'am, so You're
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:30:31
saying that the 180 days may be a bit much. So tell me how many permits are you guys reviewing? On a monthly basis.
On a monthly basis, that's going to require me to do math. Um, so in the Office of Water
Speaker 103
1:30:45
Quality, I would say we issue, we have
over 7000 permits. And so on a monthly basis, it could be over 30 to 50, maybe even 100 at times,
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:30:57
OK, and, and you're familiar with the issues that we've had in in Sebastian and Crawford County with the, the stench. Have you had a
chance to To actually smell the stench? No, sir, I have not been out.
Speaker 103
1:31:10
We have had inspectors that have been out and documented certain violations, OK, and I, and, and it's my
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:31:16
understanding that we have had inspectors out who have documented, but nothing has ever happened.
It's my understanding because the people are continuing to violate the law or the permit is my understanding and our constitu I have people that are literally getting sick behind the smell that these companies are dropping and, and it's dropping in a county that's not even in mine, but the stench reigns, I mean, miles and miles away. And You know, if this is gonna add some some work to to you guys. I'm OK with that, uh, but the most important thing is, is the, the reaction that our people are
having to what this company is doing and I,
Chair
Unverified
1:31:57
I'll leave it there, but I'm 100% supporter of the bill. Representative Lady,
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:32:03
man, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um How do you enforce the requirements of these permits. I mean, Do
you have regular inspections? Do you respond to complaints? How do you enforce that? We
Speaker 103
1:32:16
respond to complaints and then we also have a records review, um, we do that, um. It's not quite annually, but we
do review their records and so any violations that would be noted, then we would take enforcement action. We have, we've issued consent administrative orders with a civil penalty. So you have issued fines to people in the past. Yes sir.
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:32:36
Um All right, thank you. Representative Rose, you recognize? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:32:56
Sorry if some of this is redundant
to your testimony. Um, But why do you think that
these representatives and the co-sponsors feel this bill is necessary.
Speaker 103
1:33:08
I, I don't want to speak to their intentions, but I believe they Shared that in their testimony, the constituent concerns.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:33:16
It's not just constituent concerns. I mean It's the representatives' concerns as well, um. Why is this still an issue?
The, the odor? Well, the odor is, um, The byproduct of the
waste, the excessive waste in Crawford County. So why is this still an issue? So what
Speaker 97
1:33:42
we're doing, like we said, we are Issuing consent administrative orders for violations that we've observed, been reported
Speaker 103
1:33:48
to us, documented. The second thing we are doing is trying to issue more permits in order to create more land available for this
land application so that it's not so concentrated in one area. The these permits, like I said, they, we want them to be sound, defensible, and protective, and so they do take time. We are meeting regularly, um, in order to get these permits issued, we have diver staff from other projects in order to have more staff time available for these permits and we've issued. 12 to 15 in the last few months and so we are working on more. Have you been to the site personally? No, sir.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:34:32
You mentioned that you've issued orders. What do those orders do?
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:34:36
They require them to comply with their permit and they issue a civil penalty. Are
Speaker 103
1:34:42
they complying? In unless they are reporting to us, um, that they're not or we're observing not we understand that they are. So you haven't been
Speaker 261
1:34:49
to the site, you issued the orders for them to comply. And since you're not going there, the
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:34:54
only way for us to know if they're complying is if they tattle on themselves. Is that correct? No, sir. Our inspectors go there. I, I
Speaker 97
1:35:02
personally have not been to the site. I may have misunderstood your question. So when were your
Speaker 263
1:35:09
inspectors there last? Um, I don't know last, but so you yourself have
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:35:12
not been to the site. You don't know when your inspectors have been to the site, and the only way that we can know if they're not complying is if they tell us themselves, hey, we're not complying and now we have to pay a fine or we receive
Speaker 253
1:35:22
a complaint or an inspector is out to the site. When was the last complaint filed? I'm not
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:35:30
sure. I'm sorry, we've not met. I know you're testifying against this
bill, but you yourself have not been there. You don't know when the last complaint was filed. You don't know when the last time the
inspectors were on site. So how are we supposed to take your testimony seriously against this bill if you don't
Speaker 103
1:35:48
have that information. Uh, I was more speaking on the procedures that this bill created. And The concerns with our ability to Focused on the procedures versus our, um, the current processes that we have in place for compliance enforcement and the
ability to revoke a permit due to noncompliance. Is
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:36:08
there somebody who could testify to when the inspectors were last on site or to when anybody was last on site. I can
Speaker 262
1:36:14
look it up on our website. I mean that's,
that's up to the charity. Let me ask a question and then we'll get back to you. Yep, thank you. So I think my concern is, and this is the ADQ, but I think my concern is the bill sponsors presentation was, is this stuff's been outlawed in
these other states. Did I hear that correctly?
So how are we able to get a permit to do it in Arkansas and what makes our soul makeup. are The level, the ability for this stuff to get into our groundwater different than Missouri and Oklahoma when we're right there.
So I can't imagine the soul being that much difference right across the border. It, it is not
Speaker 103
1:36:55
the reason why this process was removed in Missouri has nothing to do with their soul makeup or groundwater or any different, so walk me through it. So we have always
Speaker 262
1:37:06
had this permitting procedure since since I have been there, so we have these permits in existence already. The there was an increase in
the amount. This is where you department people try to outlaw me and it doesn't work. I'm,
I'm a dirt farmer, OK? So we're gonna go slow and easy here. I didn't ask you what the process was or how our process was. I asked you why we allow it
when these other two states don't allow it, and then I gave a example of why I think
they should or didn't. I want to know from you why we do and they don't, period. That's it. It's all I wanna know. Because no one has
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:37:45
banned our ability to issue that the proper way to issue this bill would have been a banned and not a 3
strikes and you got to do that, you're out on the permit. I, I can't speak to the will of their will was to get rid of it, would that not have been the proper way to get rid of it. That would have been a mechanism, I believe that would
probably left some industries in in distress, but that's what happened in Oklahoma, Missouri as they filed legislation that said you cannot put this on our property in our states
Speaker 262
1:38:18
in a roundabout way, yes, sir. OK. Representative Rose,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:38:21
do you have a follow-up? I do. Thank you. Have you had conversations or meetings with industry leaders about this? The poultry poultry industry. Has anybody in your
organization met or had conversations? Yes, they have been to our
Speaker 97
1:38:35
office, yes, so, uh, again, I want to go
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:38:39
back to, you mentioned that this is about policy and procedures, and it seems like the policy and procedures that you hear testifying to are not doing anything to alleviate the issue because it continues. And I'm in the area as these two representatives are is Representative Richardson is, um, it's a constant issue. And um The policy and procedures are not fixing it. So, is there somebody in your agency who could at least come down here and tell us if the policy and procedures are
working, like when was the last time they were fined? When's the last time there was an inspection? When was the last time somebody
Speaker 103
1:39:18
was on site? I, I know within the last month they have been on site. What happened with that? I do know that. So how that works is we have a an investigation. We issue a report and if there are findings, it's referred to enforcement. Um, I, I don't want to speak to um drafts that are, you know, Haven't been proposed and reviewed or anything like that, but we have issued consent
administrative orders, uh, I believe that there have been other recent violations that have been referred to enforcement and so that process would be ongoing at this time. So let's do this. I
got, I got one more, Mr. Chairman. I understand. Hold on. Wait, wait till I make this reference. I think it's gonna help you. We're gonna
meet again upon adjournment. House bills will still have time to make it through the process from this afternoon. So why don't you go back to your department, get us some defense your, from your not defense, not the wrong wrong word from your
folks at the department get some answers, be able to come back and legitimately be able to answer these questions from the members, and we'll pick up right here with you at the table when we come back after
a session. Representative Rose, is that amenable? Follow your lead, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Let's do that. Representative Hall, are you OK
with that? Yes, sounds great. OK. All right. So let's do
that and uh I'm gonna start, we have some members on their way here from other committees, but until they get here, I'm gonna start
calling bills off. These bills will get a strikes representative Acer, you can go ahead and go to the table.
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:41:04
We'll start with yours. Thank Mr. Chairman, committee, Representative Baker, District 71, here to represent House Bill 1961, uh, so this is a bill that was brought to me by some healthcare providers. It's a simple bill. It allows them to.
Oh, no, I'm not writing an amendment. So I did have it drafted, but uh we've met with the individuals who had concerns and we've been able to quiet that with no opposition. OK. OK, you're OK. Uh, so what this bill does is it allows a healthcare provider who orders a test to put a temporary hold on that test being automatically uploaded and available to the patient. Uh, this allows them, if they have believable cause that the patient would be harmed or that there can be some anxiety
induced from the medical jargon that comes from that test, it has to be provider specific and test specific, uh, so real world example, um, when I get my CT scans results, um, they're written in such a way that they don't offer any sort of diagnostic, um, information, but they can provide some troubling language and what this allows is if the provider who ordered the test wants time to review it, set up an appointment, and have a treatment plan. We don't want to interrupt that continuity of care, and so it can't be a
blanket restriction. I believe the temporary restrictions only for 30 days, um. And again, I do feel that providers who have issued these have ran into issues where um it's a Friday night and a test is uploaded to the portal and it's kind of freaked their patient out a little bit and they're not able to get a hold of that provider to get some clarity, um, this kind of maintains that patient-provider relationship with the test, and it's specific to a test. It can't be their entire profile, and it can only be for a temporary amount of time.
Speaker 281
1:42:49
So with that I welcome any questions. Yeah,
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:42:57
uh, I'll take a question. Thank you. Um, yeah, I think I'm, I'm support this bill, but I am curious, and I didn't see this. I mean, if there is a situation like let's say, um, a test comes back and for some reason a provider is, has like a medical emergency comes up and it's
not a be found, but you've got a patient who's waiting on a test. I mean. And, and they're on pins and
needles the whole time trying to know whether or not this test gets back. I mean, is there any way for them to get that
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:43:26
information and and I'm sorry I missed the beginning of the presentation, so yeah, so actually the provider itself is the only one that can have that restriction from the provider. They can't delegate that to any other provider. So if the patient met with another provider and that provider wanted to release the test or see it or if the or if the patient re reached out to the lab or the people who actually did the testing or the um imaging, they can still do that. So they can't delegate the restriction to anybody else
other than Them themselves so they can't delegate
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:43:52
the restriction, but they can delegate the releasing of it to someone else. I don't believe that they can, they
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:43:58
can't, if a patient met with another provider, that provider could release that. OK, well, I guess what I'm saying is, so
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:44:04
let's say you've got a multiple provider clinic and The provider for some reason is not able to. To release it or hasn't released yet for whatever reason. I can't call up and say, hey, I've been waiting for these results. I haven't got them back yet, you know, Doctor Johnson, I know is,
was in a car accident, but I'm needing these results can can Doctor Rose get these results to me and go over them with me. Is that possible? Yes, that's OK, that's, that's just what
I wanted to know. Any further questions? Representative
Representative Kenneth B. Ferguson
Unverified
1:44:40
uh Ferguson. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, get two questions, uh, Representative Aker. You said something about 30 days.
Is that the provider has 30 days
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:44:53
before he or she can release the information to the 30 days before they lose their ability to withhold it. So if they can't get an appointment with the patient or they can't follow up and call the patient and release that, then it automatically becomes available within 30, after 30 days. So basically the provider has 30 as contemporary up to 30 days, they can put a week, 2 weeks, up to 30 days to try and coordinate a time where they can sit down with the patient, go over the news, because as you can imagine, um, there can be some heavy consequences to people
misinterpreting and Googling test results on stuff as as serious as cancer or as serious as a broken arm or what is, where is that line the providers, I believe, want the ability to maintain that relationship with the patient and give the full scope of their skills and assessment. Yeah, one follow up. The reason why I asked that question, I had
Representative Kenneth B. Ferguson
Unverified
1:45:42
a similar situation. I had to wait 2 weeks and I thought something was
seriously wrong with me. Then I had to get an appointment because I had to pay for the appointment, so I go
back to the provider because I couldn't get information after I looked on the portal and saw the test. And then I had to wait 2 weeks,
Speaker 290
1:46:03
probably 2.5 weeks. And I thought I was checking out, but I wasn't right. I
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:46:09
would think that that scenario is more um problematic with the portal, this would be the provider themselves making a specific request on Mr. Ferguson's result for this specific test. It's not your entire profile. It's just saying if we're testing for something that the provider wants to have a one on one
conversation with you about to give you the full complexity of the situation, they can cherry pick what tests they really want. One last question. The provider wants to test
Representative Kenneth B. Ferguson
Unverified
1:46:35
for my liver. But he wants to wait before he talks to me after the test, so therefore I can't see the results. Of the test, is this what this bill does? Only if that provider wants to put that
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:46:51
restriction on there. If you reach out to the uh lab that did the test, you can still get those results. OK.
Representative Kenneth B. Ferguson
Unverified
1:46:59
So I can get the results regardless of what the what the provider. It's attempting to that portal you
Speaker 279
1:47:04
have, that's where he would put the hold on it because he wants to see you to go over those results.
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:47:10
If you were adamant about getting those, you still have an avenue through the testing agency that actually performed the test. OK. Represent Barnes. So, thank you, thank you,
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:47:31
chairs. So the basis of this bill is basically to be able to have a conversation with a patient. That may be receiving some um. Bad information concerning the a test that they've had on their body 3 months to live, maybe a month to live, something like that, and they want to make sure they sat down with them. Talk to them kind of help him through it before they get that information without having someone to talk with them. That's that's the
basis of it. Yes, sir. Yeah. OK. Great idea. Any further questions? Representative Cooper, if you would come see me for a second.
Any further questions? Seeing none, anyone in the audience beat 4 against the bill. You recognize clothes for your bill, which I hope you are. I'm very much closed. Thank you. I have a motion to pass. All those in favor say aye.
All opposed, I just have it with that. Congratulations bill passed. Representative Hudson, you're recognized to introduce yourself and present your bill for the committee. With the chair's permission, may I have a guest come join me at the table.
If you will identify yourself for the record and you'll be recognized to help present. Good morning, chair. I'll
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
1:49:21
turn you off. Good morning, Chairman. My name is Melissa Farmer. Revers and Hudson, hold
on one second. Members we're getting close. To the end of the session to the end of House bills being able to
move forward. I'll make this announcement, so everybody can hear us in here and everybody can hear us out of here. We're going to issue the committee to meet at the call of the chair upon adjournment. We're going to adjourn at 12 to 12:15 this morning. We're gonna come back after the session. I'm gonna hear house bills only first and then Senate bills. And then Thursday, we will only hear Senate bills. I've held senators off all morning to give you guys the preference to get your bills heard. So if you have a bill on the
agenda and you want to be heard. I myself, Miss Davis,
our Representative Woolbridge needs to be notified in the next 5 to 10 minutes so we can plan this afternoon. With
that, Ms. Hudson, you're to present your bill. Thank
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
1:50:22
you, Mr. Chair and thank you committee colleagues today I'm presenting House Bill 1880, um, which is meant to amend the Arkansas Human Life Protection Act to offer
some narrow exceptions to our abortion ban.
Now as legislators, we are tasked often with making decisions that reflect the values of our constituents and uphold the
principles that guide us as a state. The issue of abortion is one that demands both compassion and careful consideration of the circumstances surrounding each case. This bill presents a proposal to introduce limited exceptions to the state's abortion ban and instances of rape and incest when the life and health of the mother are at risk, and in cases of fatal fetal abnormalities.
These exceptions are designed to address the rare and heart-wrenching situations where a woman is confronted with choices that no one should ever have to face. By allowing for these exceptions, we ensure that our laws reflect not only our commitment to the sanctity of life, but also our ability to respond with humanity and empathy when the circumstances are both extraordinary and tragic. It's about striking the right balance, upholding core values of life, providing necessary protections when there's no
clear path forward and ensuring that we avoid significant physical, emotional, or moral harm to the mother. In
the period between 2018 and 2021, Arkansas had a maternal mortality rate of 43.5 deaths per 100,000 births, which is almost double the national average. Notably black women in Arkansas face even higher risks experiencing maternal deaths at a rate of 71 per 100,000 live births, which is more than twice the rate for non-Hispanic white women.
Additionally, since 2022, when the Dobbs decision was handed down in the US Supreme Court, we have seen those maternal mortality rates increase in states that have restrictive abortion laws, primarily in southern US states, which has led to tragic outcomes, including near fatalities and preventable deaths among women experiencing pregnancy complications. These laws, which are intended to limit abortion access of sometimes resulted in delays or denial of necessary medical care, which has exacerbated health risks, and I won't go through
all of these now, but all of us have no doubt heard in the news the cases of women in places like Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama who have either died or almost died because they were not provided the abortion care that they needed, the life saving care that they needed in order to, to ensure that their health and safety were were taken care of. When we're talking about cases of Children? Right now, it is a
Speaker 308
1:53:21
So word of advice, I would not touch the microphone. I didn't touch it. I
would not touch the microphone at all. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And then I would speak into it. You have better luck. You're touching it again. You
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
1:53:40
just can't down, otherwise I'm gonna be standing up trying to cut off again. I'm
just giving you insight. Do not touch it, it won't go off. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As of right now, It is the public policy of the
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
1:53:52
state of Arkansas to require children to give birth. My 13 year old is trying to call me right now. It is the public policy of the state of Arkansas to sell my 13 year old who is not even in high school, that she must carry a pregnancy to term. It's the public policy of the state of Arkansas to tell my 11 year old son that he's ready to be a father. That is the reality of the state of the law today. We know that when children are forced to give birth, it leads to a number of negative health outcomes for them. The physical
toll on their bodies alone is sufficient to justify a need for an exception for these children who are victims of rape and incest, but there is also a significant mental and emotional toll on these children. I would also point out that Arkansas has one of the highest indices of sexual violence against children. And those, uh those indices of sexual violence are grossly underreported, especially in cases of rape and incest by a family member. So it's likely that our numbers are even higher. And of those, a
significant percentage of those sexual assaults and rapes and, and in instances of incest result in pregnancies that these children are forced to carry to term. To me, it is absolutely appalling that in Arkansas, we require children who are not old enough to carry a gun who are not old enough to buy a pack of cigarettes or some beer or get conscripted into the army who are not old enough to make decisions about what library books they want to read. We tell them that they're old enough to have children.
Finally, in cases of fatal fetal abnormalities. These
are women who are often faced with the most difficult choice of their life for, for pregnancies that they desperately wanted. These are situations in which doctors often 2nd and 3rd opinions have made the conclusion the devastating conclusion that the fetus that the woman is carrying is incompatible with life. And we're telling these women that they have no choice in how to move forward. We are telling these women that they lives matter less.
And that they are merely a vessel for what is likely to be a situation where this fetus is born, um, may experience pain in the brief time that they are alive and requiring the mother to go through the agony of giving birth in a situation in which they know that there is absolutely no hope. And I can tell you from friends who have gone through this agonizing situation that
it is difficult for them, for their families, and for their other children. I've brought a witness today
because I think often the toll and the effect of these laws is lost in the political discourse. And so I brought a witness today to provide some insight as to her experience. And to give you A little bit of a real live example of the after effects of dangerous bands like ours. And I would very much appreciate the committee's attention and respect to her. So Since we do have to leave at
12:15, I'm going to allow this witness to uh speak. But again, the same ruling as ruled in the previous bill will be in this bill, you will not be allowed to speak again when we come back. This afternoon, but we'll pick this bill up first when we come back this afternoon to hear a testimony for and against, because we do have quite a few signed up on both sides. So with that, I'll allow you to testify. And that's up to you, Representative Hudson, how you
want to do that. No, that's fine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning. Again, my name is Melissa Farmer.
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
1:57:37
My messages of love unfulfilled. I believe that with great suffering. It can manifest either bitterness. Or compassion. It's a choice daily to love. The
Speaker 314
1:57:50
love that I have for Maeve. Gives me the courage to fight for the world worthy of her. My husband and I were full of hope and the promise of our daughter, Maeve. Our greatest dream.
Speaker 315
1:58:09
It was a family with a curly redheaded world changer. At 40 years old,
Speaker 314
1:58:16
I knew it was now or never. At around 10 weeks of my pregnancy, the Dobbs decision overturned Roe versus Wade. Tri immediate abortion ban in Missouri. I remember reading a story about a woman in Texas who nearly died from a pee prom. Her water broke early. That is a pre. term
premature rupture of the membranes, also known as a water break. The
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
1:58:46
doctors refused to help her. Her story was terrifying. A reality sank in. My pregnancy could become dangerous and even life threatening. And then I did. A few short weeks later,
Speaker 314
1:59:02
my dream became a nightmare as I heard the doctor's prognosis of PR. They told me to leave the state
Speaker 315
1:59:11
because the law prevented them from giving me the care that I needed. And even though Maeve was no longer viable. There was a heartbeat. That
Speaker 316
1:59:26
meant they wouldn't help until I was actively dying. I was haunted
Speaker 315
1:59:33
by that Texas mother's story, and I took every step to get the care best that I could.
I called every hospital within 6 hours of driving from my home to Illinois. No hospital was willing to help me. So finally I decided to drive to Kansas City, where abortion was legal. I was afraid
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:00:06
that my husband would be charged in assisting on abortion, so I drove the entire drive myself.
I remember having to. Doctors in Kansas City
Speaker 320
2:00:26
told me the same thing, that even though abortion
Speaker 315
2:00:29
was legal in Kansas, it was too politically heated in this environment right now to give
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:00:34
me my care. Their attorneys would not allow it. They told me to go back to my first hospital. And wait for what was next.
Speaker 315
2:00:46
What was next, they said. It was bleeding. It was pain. It was fear. Sepsis Blood clots, hysterectomy. The next day I called my
Speaker 324
2:01:02
senator. He was shocked. And he told me that there was an
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:01:08
exception for the life of the mother. And surely that ensures and encompasses my situation.
Speaker 315
2:01:17
He sent me to an anti-abortion clinic. As his only option. And of course, he would see the dire situation, so I went. And they confirmed what I already knew. That Maeve wouldn't survive. And they couldn't even say the word abortion. Let alone recommend it. I called the senator back. And his response was,
I don't know what to tell you. He's pro-life and he's not going back up for re-election. Good
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:01:59
luck. Again, I was in pain and I was bleeding and I was scared
Speaker 315
2:02:05
for my life. Well also trying to process this unimaginable grief of losing our daughter. What was pro-life about any of this? That heartbeat.
That sound that filled us with joy and hopeful tears. It became my greatest torment. No one should ever have to hear that heartbeat and wish it would end just so that you could live. That sound will haunt
Speaker 326
2:02:39
me for the rest of my life. And to make things even worse, my own
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:02:45
church members told me that I deserved this. That because I was unmarried to my husband Matt.
That this was God's righteous punishment. They asked me to wait in the hospital on their prayer. Against
Speaker 314
2:03:04
my doctor's stern advice. In the hospital, I pleaded desperately for Maeve's life so hard that the hospital sent a NICU doctor down to my
Speaker 315
2:03:13
room. After describing the torturous ways in which she was being constricted slowly to death by my uterus. I understood the futility of my pleas when he said.
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:03:25
Ma'am, there are things that are worse than death, and I have seen
Speaker 315
2:03:33
it. That was the strongest way of saying that the hope of Maeve was lost. I finally found Help through an abortion hotline. And they got me an appointment the next day. 5.5 hours away. Again.
Speaker 318
2:03:57
This was the 3rd day, and every time we passed the hospital. I thought, should we stop? Will they help me? Will I even survive the rest of this trip? No. I kept driving.
Speaker 315
2:04:13
When we arrived at the clinic, my husband parked and waited in the car. He watched me walk past protesters with signs and trailers and screens. Calling me a murderer.
He was a powerless entirely in this situation. And he is still trying to deal with
Speaker 314
2:04:40
this and cope with it to this day. I survived, but not without scars. The physical and the emotional
Speaker 315
2:04:47
and financial toll of these abortion laws. have been devastating. of being independent. Employed a homeowner. To now disabled. Homeless And I cannot even afford my basic needs.
And I can't even remain healthy enough to remain employed. This abortion denial has directly sent my life into a death spiral that I can no longer recover from. This
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:05:20
loss is unimaginable. And yet I consider myself fortunate. Because another woman. told her
Speaker 326
2:05:29
story. And that story saved my life.
Speaker 315
2:05:36
I finally met that brave woman. And now I'm here to continue the work of saving people from harm. I urge you
Speaker 314
2:05:45
to commit today as I have years ago, to not let this happen to anyone else. Do not assume that there
Speaker 315
2:05:52
is safety, even an exceptions when I was bleeding and I was begging for help. When I was on the verge of losing my life, no politician saved me.
Speaker 314
2:06:08
Imagine for a moment if doctors tell you that you may die without this care, but some politician says
Speaker 336
2:06:17
they know what's better for you. Any delay in medical decisions can be catastrophic. Women
Speaker 316
2:06:22
have died with less time than I had. Little
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:06:27
has been done to stop the suffering. In fact, some are pushing for exceptions, for no exceptions. Some states are even calling for murder charges against women like me.
Speaker 315
2:06:40
They've even suggested that women who have no children. Or family shouldn't be allowed to vote. Let that
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:06:48
sink in for a minute. I lost my ability. to have a child forever because of this.
Speaker 336
2:07:01
So Today I ask you to support this bill. I ask that the House
Speaker 314
2:07:07
supports Bill 1880 and give women like me
a chance to receive the care that they deserve here in Arkansas, because we're not asking for too much. When we ask for common sense exceptions in our abortion laws. I stand here because somebody once stood for me. And it saved my life. Even if we disagree. Even if you would not stand for me? I believe in
Speaker 315
2:07:36
loving my neighbors. And that love is why I would
Speaker 318
2:07:43
fight for them. Democracy is the truest form of
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:07:47
love. It simply means I may not understand what
Speaker 315
2:07:49
you're going through, but I will fight for you and your right to freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
2:07:55
What is more American than that? Thank you. I just again ask you to vote yes for this bill. Thank you. Ma'am, thank you for your
testimony, Representative Hudson, thank you for bringing this bill. So members we are up against a hard deadline, uh,
what we're going to do is we're going to go into recess. We'll meet 15 minutes upon adjournment. We will continue uh with this bill, and we'll continue with questions for the witness when we come back. Again, we'll be in recess until 15 minutes upon adjournment a parliamentary inquiry,
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
2:08:30
so we're, we're gonna continue with this testimony. OK, got you. We are. Yes, sir. Yeah my husband had to sit in
Speaker 337
2:08:39
the car because it this is just re him too.
Speaker 341
2:08:46
but there's no reason this actually works out really well for you because you don't have to sit through all this.
Speaker 342
2:08:50
Thank you so much for letting me speak. I've been waiting for a long time to speak officially on a job. He really did.
Agenda
CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1468 Cozart TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING CLAIMS AGAINST HOME IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTORS, RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CONTRACTORS, AND SUPPLIERS.
REGULAR AGENDA
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1332 Pilkington TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO COVER GLUCAGON- LIKE PEPTIDE-1 RECEPTOR AGONISTS, ALSO KNOWN AS GLP-1 AGONISTS, WHEN PRESCRIBED FOR WEIGHT LOSS.
HB1588 McAlindon TO REQUIRE APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES SEEKS OR IMPLEMENTS AN EXPANSION OF COVERAGE FOR THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM.
HB1762 Hall TO REQUIRE REVOCATION OF A PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE IN AN AGRICULTURAL OR PASTORAL APPLICATION FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS.
HB1776 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE CERTIFICATE OF NEED REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A SOLID WASTE LANDFILL OR TRANSFER STATION PERMIT OR AN EXPANSION OF A SOLID WASTE LANDFILL OR TRANSFER STATION PERMIT.
HB1791 C. Cooper TO CLARIFY THAT THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND THE UNITED NATIONS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OR POWER IN THIS STATE AND DO NOT HAVE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE OR IMPLEMENT ACTIONS IN THIS STATE.
HB1795 A. Brown TO CREATE THE FERTILITY CLINIC LICENSURE ACT.
HB1816 L. Johnson TO PROHIBIT HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS AND HEALTHCARE INSURERS FROM USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE DELIVERY OF HEALTHCARE SERVICES OR THE GENERATION OF MEDICAL RECORDS UNLESS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
HB1818 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE MEDICAID PROVIDER-LED CARE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.
HB1819 L. Johnson TO REQUIRE THE STATE REGISTRAR OF VITAL RECORDS TO COORDINATE WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES TO CONTACT MOTHERS FOR SUPPORT AND ASSISTANCE DURING THE POSTPARTUM PERIOD.
HB1880 Hudson TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS HUMAN LIFE PROTECTION ACT AND THE ARKANSAS UNBORN CHILD PROTECTION ACT TO ADD CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS.
HB1882 Pilkington TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF ENROLLABLE MEDICAID BENEFICIARY POPULATION AND ALLOW THE GOVERNOR TO DESIGNATE MEDICAID POPULATIONS TO BE ENROLLED UNDER THE MEDICAID PROVIDER-LED ORGANIZED CARE ACT.
HB1888 Steele TO AMEND THE DIVISION OF WORKFORCE SERVICES LAW; AND TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT RECORDS FOR INDIVIDUALS.
HB1890 J. Mayberry TO ALLOW SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO BILL FOR HEALTHCARE SERVICES; AND TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO REIMBURSE SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR CERTAIN HEALTHCARE SERVICES.
HB1906 Lundstrum TO REQUIRE WRITTEN CONSENT OF A PARENT OR LEGAL GUARDIAN WHEN PRESCRIBING LONG-ACTING REVERSIBLE CONTRACEPTION TO A PERSON WHO IS YOUNGER THAN EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE.
HB1908 Long TO CREATE THE PROOF OF RESIDENCY FOR PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ACT; TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING PUBLIC ASSISTANCE; AND TO REQUIRE PROOF OF RESIDENCY FOR ADULT APPLICANTS.
HB1909 Long TO CREATE THE PUBLIC SERVICES ONLY FOR CITIZENS ACT; AND TO REQUIRE VERIFICATION OF CITIZENSHIP AND RESIDENCY IN ORDER TO RECEIVE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE.
HB1915 Eubanks TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO REQUEST A BROAD- BASED CATEGORICAL ELIGIBILITY WAIVER FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM; AND TO AMEND THE ASSET LIMITS UNDER THE PROGRAM.
SB9 B. Davis TO CREATE THE MAKE ARKANSAS HEALTHY AGAIN ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT MANUFACTURING, SELLING, DELIVERING, DISTRIBUTING, HOLDING, OR OFFERING FOR SALE A FOOD PRODUCT THAT CONTAINS CERTAIN SUBSTANCES.
SB238 J. Payton TO AMEND THE USED TIRE RECYCLING AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.
SB473 Stone TO AMEND THE DUTIES OF THE ARKANSAS FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES BOARD; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ARKANSAS FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES BOARD TO ADVISE THE ARKANSAS FIRE TRAINING ACADEMY ON CERTAIN MATTERS.
HB1961 Achor TO ALLOW MEDICAL PROVIDERS TEMPORARY EXEMPTIONS FROM FEDERAL INFORMATION-BLOCKING REGULATIONS TO SAFEGUARD PATIENTS DURING INFORMATION DISCLOSURE; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB117 C. Penzo TO CREATE THE NATUROPATHIC PHYSICIAN PRACTICE ACT; TO PROVIDE FOR LICENSURE OF NATUROPATHIC PHYSICIANS IN ARKANSAS; AND TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF NATURAL MEDICINE.
HB1982 Wooldridge TO AMEND THE USED TIRE RECYCLING AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT; TO CREATE THE TIRE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING ACT; TO REPEAL THE USED TIRE RECYCLING FUND; AND TO CREATE THE WASTE TIRE ABATEMENT FUND.
HB1987 Ennett TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE STATE BOARD OF EMBALMERS, FUNERAL DIRECTORS, CEMETERIES, AND BURIAL SERVICES; AND TO INCREASE THE CIVIL PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS BY A LICENSEE.
SB444 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE MEDICAL ETHICS AND DIVERSITY ACT.
SB507 G. Leding TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO COVER APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS SERVICES FOR CERTAIN BENEFICIARIES.
SB546 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE TRUST FUND CONTRIBUTION FEE FOR WATER PERMITS RELATED TO NONMUNICIPAL DOMESTIC SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS.
SB554 C. Tucker TO CREATE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM.
SB560 J. English TO DECREASE THE BASE CONTRIBUTION RATE; TO INCREASE THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT RATE; TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR THE SKILLED WORKFORCE IN THIS STATE; AND TO AMEND THE DIVISION OF WORKFORCE SERVICES TRAINING TRUST FUND.
SB120 C. Penzo TO REQUIRE LICENSURE FOR ALL PRIVATE CARE AGENCIES IN THIS STATE; AND TO ENSURE CONSUMER PROTECTION FOR VULNERABLE AGING ADULTS.
SB347 C. Penzo TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO INCREASE REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR CERTAIN DENTAL SERVICES AND TO SET AN ANNUAL REIMBURSEMENT CAP FOR ADULT DENTAL SERVICES.
SB497 D. Wallace TO REQUIRE THE CREATION OF A POSTER REGARDING VETERANS' BENEFITS AND SERVICES; AND TO REQUIRE CERTAIN EMPLOYERS TO DISPLAY THE POSTER.
SB534 G. Leding TO ESTABLISH THE ARKANSAS KRATOM CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT; AND TO REMOVE MITRAGYNINE AND 7-HYDROXYMITRAGYNINE, ALSO KNOWN AS KRATOM, FROM THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES LIST IN ARKANSAS.
SB576 B. Davis TO AMEND THE COVERAGE OF CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITORS WITHIN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM.
SB601 Hester TO CREATE A PATHWAY FOR A GRADUATE OF A FOREIGN MEDICAL SCHOOL TO BE LICENSED IN THIS STATE IF HE OR SHE IS OFFERED FULL-TIME EMPLOYMENT AS A PHYSICIAN FROM A HEALTHCARE PROVIDER.
DEFERRED BILLS
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1008 A. Collins TO REQUIRE MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR POSTPARTUM MOTHERS FOR ONE YEAR AFTER GIVING BIRTH.
HB1010 A. Collins TO SET THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE IN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM FOR MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICES.
HB1011 A. Collins TO CREATE THE RESTORE ROE ACT; AND TO RESTORE A WOMAN'S ACCESS TO ABORTION SERVICES.
HB1012 A. Collins TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO EXTEND ELIGIBILITY TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS FOR FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES.
HB1013 Hudson TO PROTECT FERTILITY TREATMENT RIGHTS IN THIS STATE.
HB1029 D. Garner TO SET THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE IN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND SERVICES RELATED TO ADDICTION.
HB1032 A. Collins TO BAN CONVERSION THERAPY.
HB1132 Pilkington TO INCREASE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE SERVICES PROVIDED BY ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSES; AND TO AMEND THE PRESCRIPTIVE AUTHORITY OF AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSE.
HB1224 Nazarenko TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT; AND TO APPLY THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT TO MASSAGE THERAPISTS.
HB1244 K. Brown TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF FULL INDEPENDENT PRACTICE AUTHORITY BY A CERTIFIED NURSE PRACTITIONER OR CLINICAL NURSE SPECIALIST.
HB1270 Pilkington TO ESTABLISH A PRESCRIBED PEDIATRIC EXTENDED CARE PILOT PROGRAM THROUGH A SECTION 1115 MEDICAID DEMONSTRATION WAIVER; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
HB1302 L. Johnson TO ADD DUCHENNE MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY TO THE UNIVERSAL NEWBORN SCREENING ACT.
HB1401 Pilkington TO INCLUDE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY SERVICES WITHIN THE MEDICAID PROVIDER-LED ORGANIZED CARE ACT.
HB1463 Hudson TO PROHIBIT DISCLOSURE OF NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST MATERIALS OR TEST DATA.
SB168 Rice TO ESTABLISH A STATE EXAMINATION FOR LICENSURE OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB187 Irvin TO AMEND THE COMPOSITION OF THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID DRUG UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD TO INCLUDE PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS.
HB1532 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS RARE DISEASE ADVISORY COUNCIL.
HB1566 McClure TO REQUIRE ADOPTION OF A STATEWIDE PRACTICAL NURSING PROGRAM CORE CURRICULUM TO INCREASE CONSISTENCY IN PRACTICAL NURSING EDUCATION.
HB1592 J. Mayberry TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ALZHEIMER'S AND DEMENTIA PUBLIC HEALTH ACT.
HB1718 Gramlich TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR SURGICAL SMOKE EVACUATION IN HEALTHCARE FACILITIES LICENSED IN THIS STATE.
HB1723 Pilkington TO AMEND INITIATED ACT 1 OF 2000, ALSO KNOWN AS THE TOBACCO SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS ACT; AND TO DIRECT THE ARKANSAS MINORITY HEALTH COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH AND ADMINISTER A GRANT PROGRAM FOR SCHOOL-BASED HEALTH CENTERS.
HB1731 Vaught TO STRENGTHEN CHILD LABOR LAWS THROUGH THE REINSTATEMENT OF EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATES.
HB1781 Crawford TO AUTHORIZE THE LICENSURE OF CLINICS, HEALTH CENTERS, OR OTHER FACILITIES IN WHICH A PREGNANCY IS TERMINATED OR ABORTED IF CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES ARE MET.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — PUBLIC HEALTH, WELFARE AND LABOR COMMITTEE- HOUSE, Apr 8, 2025 | Agenda | 4 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge Chair
Unverified
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
Speaker 17
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
Speaker 40
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Chair
Unverified
Speaker 47
Speaker 29
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
Speaker 133
Chair
Unverified
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
Speaker 69
Speaker 76
Speaker 85
Speaker 97
Speaker 98
Speaker 101
Speaker 103
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
Speaker 119
Speaker 121
Speaker 131
Speaker 140
Speaker 141
Speaker 144
Speaker 78
Speaker 145
Speaker 143
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
Speaker 75
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
Speaker 166
Speaker 168
Speaker 170
Speaker 176
Nick Staley
Unverified
Speaker 182
Speaker 191
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
Speaker 209
Britney Um
Unverified
Brittany Stockton
Unverified
Holly Skipper
Unverified
Speaker 215
Speaker 216
Speaker 147
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
Representative Chad Puryear
Unverified
Speaker 238
Speaker 245
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
Speaker 261
Speaker 263
Speaker 253
Speaker 262
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
Speaker 281
Representative Kenneth B. Ferguson
Unverified
Speaker 290
Speaker 279
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
Melissa Farmer
Unverified
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
Speaker 308
Speaker 314
Speaker 315
Speaker 316
Speaker 320
Speaker 324
Speaker 326
Speaker 318
Speaker 336
Speaker 337
Speaker 341
Speaker 342