Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Welcome back everybody. We are turning to S197. We have a small amount of time. Worked with the Lenture Council yesterday. Thank you, Leslie, for your help and think that maybe Jen Scott has been listening to us and our conversations For your consideration. This is the claim on that we got, doctor? No.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It's not the Jen Harvey, Office of Legislative Council. This is S197 draft 2.2. Still showing markup. There's new markup. This is an accolating to what is currently an accolating to the form for primary And it starts out with the legislative intent and what has navigational purpose is. And so it keeps the language from the last draft around intent, invest in primary care and establish a program of universal primary care with those same provisions. Subsection B, the purposes of this bill are to obtain the information necessary to develop a framework for implementation of universal primary care to optimize the blueprint for health. Number three, determine whether the blueprint is an appropriate mechanism for which to provide universal primary care. And four, explore other approaches to universal primary care and whether they may be more suitable than the blueprint in meeting Vermont We

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: talk about it. We did have a car loss before and we turned it into a rest. I guess we tried to remove assumptions. Okay. Because I know when we did have a comma,

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: we were, like, going insert something in there. Okay. Okay. Okay. Then we have section two. I don't think we made any changes to the blueprint language since the last grant. Section three is titled Blueprint Payments to Practices. Maybe it doesn't need to be but Primary Care and Roots Work. The changes here, it still has the director of the Blueprint in consultation with the Blueprint Executive Committee and the Vermont Steering Committee for Comprehensive Primary Health Care reporting to this committee in Senate Health and Welfare in January regarding changes to the payment amounts or payment methodologies, taking out reform that was in there, but probably shouldn't have been, or both that and then I think the chair was saying removing some assumptions that would be necessary, not are necessary. Was it representative Goldman who

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: said? Somebody

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: said it wasn't sure. That would be necessary to transition the blueprints per person from payments to primary care practices to include payment for the routine primary care needs of attributed patients covered by participating health plans. The report shall, and then we still have establishing definitions of primary care services, primary care provider. Most of the provisions stay the same as previous draft. Took out this establishing the target for the amount per person per month spending that should be for primary care services. That goes back to being its own standalone section with the agency of human services doing that. It comes out of this blueprint report. They keep the analysis of ways to incorporate a primary care spending allocation target into the methodology because I think that was still relevant. In number 10, description of the ways the Blueprint can optimize delivery of services within its current initiatives and the amount that would be required to support that. The editor pointed out that I said per member per month here and everything else is per person per month. So making this consistent. And then adding a new 11 that would have the Blueprint recommend a process for moving to the healthcare claims tax established in statute as the mechanism to fund the Blueprint as identified in the report submitted to the General Assembly in accordance of Act 51 of 2023, including providing a potential timeline for implementation?

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: If you want to go back

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: and read the 2024 blueprint, they have a big thing in there about possibly moving to Actually a standalone report, the Act 51 report, I think

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: is what it's called in the system.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Oh, that's right. It was in there. No.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Was submitted in 2024. Submitted in Act 51 of 2023, but the report then came in in January 2024.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: What was that 51 again?

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: 51 was the Diva, sort of Diva housekeeping bill of '20 Yep. '20 Alright. Section four, no changes. That is the baseline per person per month. I guess the only change is to add an SCRM definitions. Section five, this is where I put back in and somewhat modified to incorporate some changes from the earlier Senate version, the primary care spending targets. So this would have the Agency of Human Services, not the Blueprint, establish a target for the amount of per person per month spending on Vermont residents that should be for primary care services and develop a transitional schedule that increases the target over time and have them report by 01/01/2028 with the provide the spending targets and transitional schedule as well as any recommendations for adjustments to the targets that are needed to reflect payer specific differences such as age and health status. And that will come to this committee and help you author. And then the structure language was just the way it had previously kind of referred to what would have been enacted in ATVSA seven ten. Section, what now becomes Section six, is having the Agency of Human Services Green Mountain Care Board and DFR in collaboration with the Office of the Healthcare Advocate evaluate the roles their respective organizations play in healthcare regulation and healthcare reform in this state. And then, of collectively determining, it directs them to identify where each health care regulation and function should most appropriately be located in order to optimize collaboration, information and efficient operations, and furtherance of attaining the principles for health care reform act 48 principles. This strikes out establishing universal primary care. That was considered sort of part of the work that was going on and not necessarily what the chair was interested in having them focus on in their report back. Improving access to high quality affordable health care services, accomplishing health and safeguarding hospital sustainability and insurer solvency. I'm not sure I cleaned this up at

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: the language, but what's the difference between a report and a report back?

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Report back is sort of jargony. I wouldn't put that in statute. The only time has to that I would say somebody has to submit an actual written report and in the form of for what you would consider a report is if it says shall submit a written report. Yes. So we just have we effectively have them report back, but I wouldn't say report back. In this case, they're actually providing their providing specific recommendations. So it leaves the form of that up to them.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Okay. Got it.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So what line is that? That is online 13.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Oh, down there. Okay. Got it.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Thank you. So by 01/15/2027, the agency, board, and department shall each provide specific recommendations on the distribution of responsibilities resulting from their efforts pursuant to subsection A of this section, including areas of agreement and disagreement, gaps and overlaps identified and any legislative changes needed to achieve their preferred organizational structures to this committee's and health and welfare and Senate Finance. And again, they need to be available to provide updates between now and February. Section six came out. There was discussed yesterday that that would need an appropriation. So what those section seven is the transitioning care to community settings report. And I will also note that they always say report in the sec because it's how my office can try to keep track of what reports you are expecting, what report facts you are expecting in whatever form. So that's why I consistently use report, but it doesn't literally mean everything has to be in the same report.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Can I say something about sections structure of section six? I just want to be clear. The reason we struck this through is we heard concerns from the board that this is very labor intensive to do this, and that it would require financial support. But also, let's not forget in Act 68, as part of reference based pricing, we kind of have them also looking at or setting floors for the community base. So if you remember in Act 68, they have a ceiling on hospital based services and then they are able to develop floors or community based. So, they're already in reference based pricing kind of looking at the concept of central reimbursements. And since it's heated in appropriation, and it's not like they're not thinking about this in the context of other work that they're carrying out, that perhaps it'd be best to strike it. That was my reasoning for striking it. Thank you. I just wanted to put that on the record. But I don't think it's not important.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Editors noted in looking through this that we usually refer to it as the statewide healthcare delivery strategic plan, suggested adding back in statewide, which I thought made sense. So I added that. Universal primary care efforts in other states. This section has also come out as I believe you had no takers for doing that work.

[David Soucy]: Section

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: eight is now renumbered, but otherwise the same having the Office of the State Treasurer work with other Northeastern states to look at the Regional and Universal Community Care Program. Section 10 is language that is included in the budget. And I've confirmed that it is in the it seems to be in the budget with no indications that's coming out. This was removing the sunset on the scholarship program for medical students. It was otherwise scheduled to be repealed on July 1. And you had proposed this committee had proposed in your budget memo to remove that sunset. That suggestion was taken up by the, not the preparations committee. It was also included from the senate appropriations committee version. So that appears to be moving in the budget. Section nine. And if somehow

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: it doesn't, you're back here before it gets actually. Actually, this isn't really for you, but did the treasurer and maybe we can speak about this. I am I missing the treasurer testified, like, one of the first days, and they said, yeah, they're fine with that. They've done this before.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. What is now the renumbered section nine is the health insurance provision that requires a health insurer to notify individuals covered under a health insurance plan who had recently taken a medication, give them at least sixty days notice before removing the blood from their formulary. And then we now have section 10 is the effective date. We had talked yesterday about perhaps an act relating to reform for primary care. That is what is in here for your review.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Go ahead, Karen. I just had two questions, Jen.

[David Soucy]: Because

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: six is eliminated, is would section seven become renumbered, section six, and so forth?

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: No. Because I've already renumbered the the newly re added back section five to be section six. Okay. So I've already renumbered. Okay. Thank you. I inspected you had, but I And the editor's checked. Yeah. And then the

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: page scan, I guess, nine. The language is somewhat changed. It just says improving access to high quality affordable healthcare services. It seems much broader than, know, moving primary care. So that language wasn't in

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: there, taking out the universal primary care. And I'll let the chair speak to her interest. This is on page 10. This is the distribution of duties between the Green Mountain Care Board, Agency of Human Services and Department of Financial Relations.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Yeah. This is so if you remember, I think it was director Olson sort of indicated that, you know, possibly she would like the focus to be a little bit not quite as prescribed because then they would start going, I'm paraphrasing, but they could spend time going down rabbit holes to try to do these prescribed things. And as I explained kind of yesterday, the rationale for this is if we're going to move ahead with reference based treatment, I'm not asking these agencies to get together to figure out who should be doing that. I'm trying to get these agencies to look at our existing signatures and how they're working together, sometimes at odds. And again, when I say at odds, I don't mean anything intentional, just that some of their divisions of duties kind of flip with each other. And so if we were going to remove anything, I didn't want to put in establishing a care because then they would all get in a room together and decide who should establish universal primary care. And I don't want them to do that. I want them to look at themselves now so that we, the legislature or whoever is sitting in these seats moving forward can make better decisions around where, if, when we do move forward with universal primary care, who is best positioned and functioned, and how can we make sure that the various agencies that we have within state government and achieve that to the best of their abilities. So that's why I removed the universal primary care. I really don't want them fighting for that. This is bigger than that. Mean, that's sort of the idea. I are they going look at themselves now, the whole system now? Hi, Dave.

[David Soucy]: What is the health care claims tax?

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: It's two thirty three. There is an

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: existing health care tax. So there's an existing tax that is imposed on all health care claims for services delivered to Vermonters. So this would be looking at whether that would be or how Blueprint is already identified, might be an easier way to get payment to support the Blueprint that would be more broadly distributed across all Vermonters who are receiving health care services in the state.

[David Soucy]: Is that a flat rate tax or how is that?

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yes.

[David Soucy]: Don't need to open up

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It's things like 1%. Point 999%. Why?

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Except Medicare and Medicaid do not pay.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: All commercial

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: All commercial benefit managers are on the list of who pays? Everyone pays except for Medicare and Medicaid. Is a report, Act 51 report. You know what we could have? I'm sure he would love this. In the next week, if we have time, we could have Nolan come in and talk about Clintus.

[David Soucy]: It's probably

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: one of his what did he say? It's his number seven favorite subject. If there's something you've written about it, mean, I'm gonna report baby. I'll let Nolan do it. And also, it goes into the general fund. And then there's a very tiny portion of it that goes into what's called the HIT, the Health Information Technology Fund. And that's what actually funds vital. There's the claims, there's the term on

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the claims tax. So it is imposed on every health insurer, and it's a very broad definition of health insurer and health insurance. There is imposed on every health insurer an annual tax in an amount equal to 0.999 of 1% of all health insurance claims paid by the insurer for its Vermont members in the previous fiscal year. It's paid in one installment due January 1. 0.199 of 1% goes into the HIT fund, and 0.8 goes into the general fund. This 0.199 part comes up every few years for review because and because it has a prospective repeal on it, thinking it was the other budget or miscellaneous tax, it would pick it up five years, so we don't have to have that conversation again for a little longer. So it goes for certain things like the annual cost to obtain information from the All Payer Claims database, our B Cures system for use by the Department of Taxes comes from the HIT Fund and the General Fund, and the same proportion of revenues are deposited into those funds. It expresses the legislative intent that all insurers contribute equitably if it was found not to be enforceable as applied to third party administrators or other entities. Tax owed by all other health insurers would remain in existing levels, then the General Assembly would have to figure out another funding mechanism that would be enforceable as to all insurers. So you can see it defaults based on that sunset of the 0.199 sunsets, and we would just type 0.8% if that ever goes into effect. But that's been happening for a number of years. Administration, the commissioner of taxes administers, so some of the details that will be to be worked out in the reporting request in the bill would be to figure out how to get money between tax and Blueprint, for example.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Do we know

[David Soucy]: how much that raised?

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. This is Nolan. These are Nolan questions. Nolan has an issue brief that he updates on the JFO webpage, and I can look with him to get

[David Soucy]: believe I'm saying this, but I look forward to it.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Yeah. I'm sorry. I went to the JFO website. Could I find it? Yeah. You go If you go to the reports, it's just called the Act 51 report. Could you send that to all committee members and also post it on our But that's not Nolan's No, that's not Nolan's private. But this is the consideration of using the claims tax as an alternative to how Blueprint is funded now. That's what that report was. To clarify, with the claims tax, and this is one of my issues with this whole thing, the claims tax encompasses everybody. That is Alyssa, everybody. So it makes it much more equitable that everybody is paying into this plan as opposed to just the only market. Insurance

[Rep. Debra Powers]: that

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: pay into the blueprint are the plans that are regulated. And also Medicaid. Medicare is no longer because of the ACO paying into Blueprint. And yet all the services that are provided by the Blueprint are actually offered to the entire population. So we have a smaller and smaller that are actually paying for the services that are provided by the blueprint. So there is a report with recommendations about how to more equitably fund the blueprint so that everyone is paying into it. So I'm just asking them to look at it Oh, yes. I

[Rep. Debra Powers]: was trying to raise it, but I don't want to

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: be like, Oh, oh, oh.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: So I'm going like, oh, never mind. Like, never mind. Like, never mind. And then it's like, okay, now is

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Tiny rock.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Yes. So that being done.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: I forgot.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: No, it's right on the tip of my tongue.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: We're right on the tongue.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: It's on the tip of my tongue. Can we somehow squeeze into this bill finding out how much the claims tax would have to be to fund universal primary care by chance? Is there somewhere in here where we could ask some group studying something?

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: We'll find out.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: How much would this have to go up to, not only to fund the blueprint, but also to fund all of you, because that might be a I'm real easy not way to to do

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: do it AHS in this bill, sort of figuring out what's kind of the optimum per member spend target for primary care and would considering that they would be calculating that number and the claims tax is a very known quantity, I'm sure that calculation could be done very easily, and I don't think we need to direct it into the bill for the sake of time.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: I actually see that point. If we get the number from the blueprint, and we know the claims tax, we can have JFO tell us that next year. But I'm just thinking the claims tax might be the most equitable way to fund universal primary care because it's not an income tax. It's not a new tax. It's using an existing tax creatively.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: When we do our summer research,

[Rep. Debra Powers]: we can talk about it more,

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: all right. Because we're going to talk about all sorts of ideas and methodologies.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Okay, I'll let it go for now.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah, okay. I did text Nolan. He's on his way, if people have questions for him.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Usually he'll be in talks with Nolan and like three minutes later he'll come walking into the room. Yeah, needs the issue. He's on the health care plan. So I'd like to Okay, any other questions about the language? I am sorry, I feel like I'm rushing people and I don't, but a few of us needed to be somewhere a bit ago. Okay. So, and we got an exemption to be in this committee room. Any thoughts, any comments, any questions? It

[Rep. Debra Powers]: was two minutes this time.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Yeah, only that one.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: He looks so happy right now.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: He said maybe next week sometime when we have time, you can talk all about your seventh favorite subject, the Klein Stats. I'm at some age.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Is he? I didn't know.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I and I sent underneath the notes at your updated issue brief

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Jen sent a smoke signal,

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I can't write

[David Soucy]: it. I apologize, I asked what the healthcare claims tax was.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: That's the right answer. Good question.

[David Soucy]: And then

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: he asked who to raise and I said that is definitely an all in trust.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: All right. Any other thoughts on the language? Anyone want to express disdain? I don't know. I guess I'm looking for

[David Soucy]: think disdain is over for the day.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: No. I think

[David Soucy]: it's good. I think it's worth looking at.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Like the great things.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I guess to it's important. Are you a doctor or a doctor? Okay, what he thought. He thinks it's good. So I felt good about hearing

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: that from him.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: And I would say, I'm notorious for email communications, but for anybody watching, I have heard and seen all your emails encouraging us, and I really thank you for those. Don't know if I'm just getting them or if you're all getting them,

[Rep. Debra Powers]: I'm getting them. Thousands of emails at this point. Thousands. I appreciate it.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: And I appreciate everybody that came to our public hearing. That was wonderful. I appreciate everybody in committee and your really robust and great conversations around primary care we had this year. I wish that we could serve in this legislature all year round, because we can do hard things, and I wish that we just did not run out of time. But I appreciate that we got exactly where we got to. At least, I would make the most Wait, is this a struggle? No.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Is Lori not going to vote?

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: We need a real vote.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Want to give her a chance?

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: She's not big enough to make it.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Can I make a motion?

[David Soucy]: I have a

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: question first.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Oh, yes, sir. No

[David Soucy]: money in just a study.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Not a dime. Wait, studies cost money. No, reports. Not reports there, as Jill said, send the letter or if they wanna do, like, interpretive dance to tell

[Rep. Debra Powers]: us what they did. I want a puppet show.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I would like shadow puppets.

[David Soucy]: The only money is really,

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Exactly. So there is a cost.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: That's what

[Rep. Debra Powers]: I'm trying to say.

[David Soucy]: But that's not

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: And this is to help identify There's no additional Yeah. They were put I mean, that's Oh my god.

[David Soucy]: Yes. But

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: If we don't we will keep this job. I think that's the question. Do we believe that we should direct people to do this, who are working To do this. To do this. I think that's the I mean, says report back, but these are people who are actually already working on these things currently. Yes. Would you like to make a more

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: spoiler alert?

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I would like make an option that we look to approve S197 draft number 2.2.

[David Soucy]: Second.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: As a minute. Allen Demar.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Yes.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Leslie Goldman. Yes. Lori Houghton. Karen Lueders. Yes. Piper Powers. Yes. David Soucy. Yes. Valerie Taylor. Yes. Daisy Berbeco. Yes. Alyssa Black. Yes. So, and. Yes, from Lori, but I don't know if she wants to be She has to be here in person.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Okay. Maybe that was on the Strouch Hall

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: for now. She was thinking it was in Strouch Hall. She had texted me and said, No, she's at Upset. Yes. So it's

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: ten through one.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Ten through one.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: And I would love

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: would for Leslie. And

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Thank you everybody. We need to meet, I just, spoiler alert, we gotta meet on, let's say, 09:30 on Tuesday before floor. We have to hear, because I believe $5.77 was just amended slightly. Can read it right now. Can on it.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: We vote But you can read the note or I can tell you now or That's just great.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: It's one

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: paragraph. It is. Yeah. But it's extremely minor. I didn't

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: It's like a straw poll. Create a remind me what ArrayRx. Yeah. ArrayRx. It's a date change and goes from card to discount. It's a card.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So I will walk through it. Okay.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Thank you.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Alright.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So this is five seventy seven, an act relating to establishing the Vermont prescription drug discount card program. They made two instances of amendment. One is purely technical. The other one is what I highlighted here. It's not I didn't do a markup for you because I didn't show you the whole thing. But in the section that you've set where you've set up the program, you had the report requirement that kept the report requirement same date. But they added at the recommendation of the Office of the Healthcare Advocate that it also report on the impact, if any, of the program on the viability of Vermont's pharmacies. As you may recall, there was some discussion with that and here, more across the hall, more downstairs. Seems like some of the concerns maybe had been ameliorated, but this would, but maybe not all. So this would have that as part of the report. And then in a later section on the special fund, if you remember, they repurposed a special fund and made it bigger to put this in. I forgot to put the word card in one of the instances of drug discount card program. So it just said prescription drug discount program. And so we're inserting card. That's it. That's technical.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Great. Unless anyone has any questions, we can stroll this now and we won't have to come in Tuesday morning.

[Rep. Debra Powers]: Want everyone to come in.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: All those in favor of concurring with the senate proposal of amendments, please raise your hand. One, two, three. Okay. Let me just skip over ten because

[Rep. Debra Powers]: I bet Lori said yes.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I I will ask Lori. I'm sorry. That's a straw poll. And you were the reporter this Okay. So we'll ask Lori, and then we can make it eleven zero zero. So this is actually because we have a token session on notice Monday, which means I

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: have to report Tuesday. Yes. Yes. Unless it's is it going?

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: It's on no. It's already on the calendar.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Oh, wait. Only the reporter of

[David Soucy]: the bill has to show up Monday.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I don't think it has to be on Ways and Means.

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: I was

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: just thinking on Wendy. Oh, thank you for up

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: to

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I just have to remember where it went in the

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: It did go to it went to both Ways and Means and No.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It went to just appropriations.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I know it went to ways and means because that was where the The finance? No. No. No. Oh,

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: January. I'm talking about January. Oh. January. Yeah. January is still across the hall.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Yes. No. No. No. I'm talking about May.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Were you talking about January?

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: Yeah. Was I'm sorry.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: I backed up a little bit because we didn't talk about when it was actually gonna be on the calendar and when I had to be 01/1997. 01/1997

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: went to appropriations in the finance, but I don't

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: I think it was finance.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It didn't go to finance. I'm looking at the history of it. Of why it went to

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: The

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: study was in the other one.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Well there's a chance it might go to There's no fiscal note.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: And we're not really remembering why it went I think it might have gone to appropriations in the Senate because as constructed, there was the suggestion that in the future there would be payments going to, all inclusive payments that might have an impact on Medicaid, guess sort of, and or the

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: I wouldn't even know if it will,

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: it'll depend. So it may or may not, 01/1997 may go straight to the floor or it may go.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: So be prepared for Tuesday. Because of the token, we're gonna a notice Tuesday and report Wednesday. Yes,

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: right. The token session That's is our first token session.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: And Wendy, so it doesn't need to go back to ways and means. No, it's actually not even officially in your committee. It's just on the calendar. Yeah.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It's just going be on the calendar.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Okay. To straw poll it? We just encourage. Maybe do what we can do. I'll let them know. Well, let's straw poll it because you have to report it.

[Jennifer Carbee (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Right. The question is does Wendy's need to stroke all of it. Does creations need to I stroke all of don't know that it usually goes to all of those. I will ask, you could certainly answer. You can ask the clerk's office.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Okay, thank you everybody. Yeah,

[Rep. Allen "Penny" Demar]: 3,000,000. Lands' assessment rates is 33,000,000, 26 of which goes to the general fund and the rest goes to the agents.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: Oh, so I should know that, right? You should look at non interest rates. Are numbers the numbers in January? Okay. Can go.

[David Soucy]: Your glasses will not be here on Tuesday.

[Rep. Alyssa Black (Chair)]: You will not be

[David Soucy]: here on