Pre-Filed Legislative Business
Ten bills from the House were pre-filed this week and assigned to House Committees:
- HB 75 introduced by Helene Keeley — From the website: “House Bill 75, sponsored by Rep. Helene M. Keeley, D-Wilmington South, would allow competent adults to receive visits in a hospital, nursing home or nursing facility from any person they choose. The measure would not overrule a facility’s visitation policies that are based on the patient’s medical condition, visitation hours or a court order. Facilities would be required to honor the patient’s advance health care directives regarding visitation.” This bill has 20 House co-sponsors and 7 so-sponsors in the Senate.
- HB 73 introduced by Rep. Jaques: Makes multiple changes to the Delaware National Guard Educational Benefits program. Section 1 requires State-supported institutions to charge members the in-state rate for tuition and fees regardless of the members’ state of residence. Sections 2 and 3 make changes to allow members to pursue master’s degree programs. Section 4 allows members to receive a grade less than a 2.0 on an individual course, but requires members to maintain a cumulative grade point average of 2.0 or higher in order to receive reimbursement. Finally, Section 5 provides that, if funding is not appropriated to fully support the program, the reimbursement for master’s degree programs will be reduced before any reductions to members applying for associate’s or bachelor’s degree programs.
- HB 72 introduced by Rep. Cathcart: This bill gives the Division of Motor Vehicles the ability to suspend the driver license of a registered sex offender if the registered sex offender does not report to the Division for an updated driver license
- HB 69 introduced by Rep. Booth: This bill seems to create a training and certification program for Direct Care employees involved with long-term care facilities. It sets out the requirements for training before certification, and while providers have to pay the cost of training, this bill would also establish a subsidy for these courses (one half of the total cost) paid for by the DOE.
- HB 67 introduced by Rep. Walls: Increases the penalties for illegally hunting wild turkeys to a class B environmental misdemeanor, punishable for a first offense by a fine of $250.00 to $1,000.00, imprisonment for up to 30 days, or both.(Currently a class D environmental misdemeanor, punishable for a first offense by a fine of $25.00 to $100.00, imprisonment for up to five days, or both.) This effort looks to try to support the ongoing Wild Turkey Restoration program.
- HB 66 introduced by Rep. Booth: Requires that felons seeking State employment may not be hired until after a one-year waiting period, which begins upon completing all the requirements of sentencing.
- HB 65 introduced by Rep. Booth: Increases the size of Sussex County Council from 5 members to 7 members.
- HB 64 introduced by Rep Booth: Allows small businesses in the State, such as school bus contracting businesses, to participate in the State Group Health Insurance Program at no cost to the State, effective July 1, 2009.
- HB 63 introduced by Rep. Booth: No private attorneys can be hired by State offices, departments, agencies, commissions or instrumentalities without the unanimous consent of the Attorney General, Governor, Chair and Vice Chair of the Joint Finance Committee.
- HB 60 introduced by rep. Kowalko: This Bill prohibits public schools, including charter schools, and school districts from making available or serving food with more than 0.5 gram of artificial trans fatty acids to students in grades K through 12.
The one thing that all of the prefilings remind me of is the promise of multiple amendments to HB1 by various Representatives — none of which look to have been published yet. So where are they?
What do you think about these bills? AND, are these summaries useful or no?
Tags: Delaware
I wonder if HB63 should be called the Randall Speck law?
HB 73 should be called the Dumb Ass Law.
2.0 or higher GPA to receive reimbursement?
El Somnambulo will give it a shot. The two most noteworthy bills, in his humble opinion, are HBs 60 and 75.
Re HB 60, it’s just common sense to reduce trans fats being served in food at public schools.
If memory serves, Rep. Kowalko had a similar bill last session, but it was bottled up in committee by the Rethugs. Kowalko doesn’t play the game the Delaware Way, and Rethugs and even some D’s don’t let him forget it.
Rep. Keeley’s bill is much-needed. Under Vince Meconi, who had his lackey Carol Ellis running the Division of Long-Term Care Residents’ Protection, enforcement of nursing home regulations was an oxymoron. Both subscribed to the opinion that facilities were over-regulated, and applied Bush ‘Potemkin Village’ regulatory standards, meaning no enforcement at all. This despite the fact that Delaware nursing facilities receive over $150 million in state and federal funding annually. But ‘Bulo digresses…
Keeley’s bill expands the universe of friendly advocates on behalf of residents. It is both humane and essential. Anyone who has ever had a loved one in a nursing facility knows that, without such advocates, residents may not receive the care that they need, especially when the State is not enforcing the law.
Some of the Booth bills look suspect. This looks like the Rethug legislative platform. HB 69 was almost certainly crafted by Wayne Smith, lobbyist for the health care industry. There are already specific and strong standards for training for health care providers. This bill appears to shift some of the costs from the providers to the State. Nice.
HB 66 looks like a PR response to the insane ‘saving’ of jobs for felons that occurred. Serious legislation on this is already in the works.
HB’s 67 & 73 look like agency legislation passed through to the appropriate chairs.
Anyway, kudos to the Special K team of Kowalko and Keeley. Those are two substantive pieces of legislation that deserve the support of the progressive community.
I’m with ‘Bulo supporting 75 & 60. I also think 73 is o.k. The others I would like to know more about.
I love the bill summaries! I hope this becomes a regular feature.
HB 64 introduced by Rep Booth: Allows small businesses in the State, such as school bus contracting businesses, to participate in the State Group Health Insurance Program at no cost to the State, effective July 1, 2009.
An effective way to help people and businesses, let’s see if the Democrats care abou this state or not.
Dissenting opinion here…
HB 60–While you make think this makes good healthy sense, in reality “artificial trans fats”, have really just become a media-hype buzz word in the food industry, that has taken a marketing gimmick, and label attachment to a new high. Most foods, including junk foods, have either 0 or very little trans fat anyway. Why burden our law books w/ a junk regulation? May as well pass a regulation saying “no arsenic added products will be used…” Let’s not feed the commercialism via regulation, which you know in turn will translate to labeling, and then a person needed to check the labeling and on and on….
Two more members on the sussex council would be a great thing, IMO. A couple of those districts are huge, and have varying degrees of needs from one end to another.
Is ‘Rebuild’ kidding? The Rethugs killed Matt Denn’s insurance pool legislation, which would have “…allow(ed) small businesses in the State…to participate in the State Group Health Insurance Program at no cost to the State”.
Now, the Repugs are looking to carve out a very narrow slice of the small business community (wonder who this legislation is specifically targeted for) for that benefit.
Uh, forgive ‘Bulo his ignorance, but if Repukes cared about the State, wouldn’t they have supported Denn’s legislation instead of killing it in the then R-controlled House?
After reading a few of Joanne’s posts, I’ve come to believe that she possesses way too many smarts and common sense to be a member of the DE GOP. Post #6 cut through the BS like Jason through a crowd at the bar.
Joanne Christian, good luck with asserting common sense into this crowd. Kowalko walks on water here.
Kowalko walks on water here.
Just because we have room for more than one messiah, don’t beat us for it. 😉
#66: Felons/state jobs
Do ex inmates need yet another road block
to stablelization (sp)? I think not. Unless
Booth enjoys the ‘revolving door’ at the
‘correction centers’ he might want to re-
consider this bill. Everyone knows if one
does not have a job one is more likely to
return to crime.
#65 Increase size of Sussex County Council.
May be they need it but I, for one, haven’t
seen any improvement since NCCC was
expanded.
#63 WTF???? I don’t get it…this bill must have
a hidden meaning or was written for
someone’s relative.
I know. I’m a flaming progressive liberal…and happy to be so 🙂
Why Reis..I am just flattered…thank you for your generous compliment….and by the way..that is DE
GOPissed off, that I subscribe to….it will ALWAYS be principles before politics with me….other people can hide behind their labels.
And anon–I know he walks on water, and rightfully so, hence my disappointment w/ this lightweight “pop” nutrition piece put forth. He does better than this. Which is why you need to help him now, so he doesn’t get known for this kind of inflated legislative necessity. Pull it!
‘Bulo agrees about Joanne. She always brings original thought here, and her perspective is always worth considering.
Joanne, just b/c your last name is ‘Christian’, you are not forbidden from joining our proud tribe of godless hordes on the left. C’mon, you KNOW you want to do it…
I’m sorry Joanne but you’re wrong about trans fats. They are real and they do have real health consequences.
So does arsenic, UI, which I believe somehow tied into her point.
UI-You are right. In labs of rats w/ total diets composed of such high concentrations…..the point I make here is the standard US school child diet at lunch, is nowhere NEAR the risk or even exposure of trans fats to warrant legislation. Again….you may as well add arsenic to the regulation. Awareness fine. Adding to the hype….ridiculous.
The difference is that the food industry isn’t typically adding arsenic to your food. Arsenic can be found in veggies and so on because arsenic is natually occuring in some soils.
Transfats are made and added to the food chain for lots of conviennce reasons. Perhaps Joanne knows beyond a shadow of a doubt what — precisely — is in the food kids are served in school. Most parents don’t know this. There are more studies than on rats on the effects of transfats — the New England Journal of Medicine (this is just a summary, link to full article is at the end) and one from the Journal of the American Heart Association. Theres lots more looking at transfats effects on humans and there is little to indicate that these fats are a neutral player.
There is an argument to be had as to whether the efforts to clearly label or to ban transfats is necessary, but there is lots of real science that indicates that this stuff is really not good for you.
Arsenic can be found in veggies and so on because arsenic is natually occuring in some soils.
I believe arsenic occurs naturally in harmless amounts but becomes harmfully concentrated in soils when it is deposited by coal burning or by mining operations….
These lab tests are very reliable. El Somnambulo hearkens back to ‘Fernwood 2Night’, and the episode in which Fernwood Community College Prof. Richard Osgood proved that leisure suits cause cancer. (You see, they dressed up the mice in tiny leisure suits… No, really!)
Unfortunately, Osgood neglected to say whether the study proved that the carcinogen in question was polyester or bad taste, but still…
Speaking of Fernwood 2Night (thread hijacking in progress…), El Somnambulo has discovered this incredible clip of Tom Waits showing up on the show as his tour van allegedly broke down in Fernwood, Ohio. And, yes, Waits is ‘Bulo’s role model:
http://bedazzled.blogs.com/bedazzled/2007/08/tom-waits-the-p.html
“Wild Turkey Restoration program. ”
I’ll drink to that!
Cassandra makes the point better than I could. Why would we add substances that are harmful to our food when we don’t have to? It’s fairly simple not to have them in there, so why would we want to? Taking arsenic out is also desirable but not as simple.
On to my next dissenting opinion–
HB 75–Back story please? I have never seen an adult patient (why is competent in there?) been denied visitation by any person they choose, except an “age limit” or number of people at a time imposed. Why is this worthy of legislation?
And moving right along to HB 69–While I would agree in the training of Direct Care employees, why should DOE pick up the tab? Shouldn’t this be allocated to Office of Aging, Long-term Facilities Budgets, Mental Health, Adult Vocational Training, Ombudsman, Special Needs and Disabilities, and probably 4 other designated agencies who should be working in concert to see this gets done. DOE has enough to oversee and be financially accountable for.
And then HB 65- sure increase to 7–it does give more wiggle room for quorums, but beware going higher and the increased drama it brings.
On their daily trek to Dover everyday it appears they are “looking ” for something to put into law., so they can show the citizens they are doing something for that $40,000 grand or so pay…is any of this common sense! Lets call it what it is…tinkering and proclaiming, ..would someone put a lid on Joe Booth….what is up with the attorney thing? No leadership here.
Re HB 75-it works both ways. Some nursing facilities do discourage extra-familial visitors, especially if they are perceived as being patient advocates who might do things like, shudder, installing nanny-cams. Not the good facilities like Mary Campbell or Jeane Jugan, but the ones that are providing substandard care, including many of the corporation-owned facilities.
Some families seek to ‘control’ the resident, in many cases b/c they are trying to gain access to the resident’s finances, and seek to discourage non-familial ‘visitors’ who might be advocates.
El Somnambulo has worked on this issue for about 15 years now, and he can cite you chapter and verse on this.
Re HB 69, it is important to understand that state law already requires minimal training standards for direct care providers, including RN’s and (more applicable to this situation) LPN’s and CNA’s. There are also minimum staffing standards both by facility and by shift. Nursing facilities are required to be adequately staffed. Therefore, they share part of the responsibility for ensuring an adequate workforce.
The state has already virtually eliminated what, at one time, was a shortage of Certified Nursing Assistants by funding programs at the Delaware Skills Center, Del-Tech and through Sussex Vo-Tech.
That’s not enough for the greedy bastards in the nursing home industry who want to shirk their share of responsibility. That is why El Somnambulo views HB 69 as custom-drafted legislation for Wayne Smith (Delaware Health Care Association) and Yrene Waldron (Delaware Health Care Facilities Association).
And lastly HB 64–targeted for small businesses “like bus companies with school contracts”– I’m a small business health care provider who contracts with Medicaid to see tons of children thru our state programs. Does that qualify me to purchase, since the Chamber of Commerce offers a deplorable plan, and I work a second job JUST FOR HEALTHCARE? Hey, if that’s so I could free up the second job for someone else! More information please!!!!
This about sums it up for me on what is presented. Thanks DeLib!
Joanne: They are cutting DHSS at least 8%, and none of the providers have had even a cost of living increase in 3 years. Why would you want to dump on providers who have never been properly funded over the last 40 years! Delaware has lost 3 providers already, no provider who is in other states, is going to jeopardize their reputations to work in Delaware for less than any other State. That has been the crux of the problem from the beginning. While Delaware is cutting our providers (even thought they gave them no money in 3 years), it will be the driving force that sends the best right out of here. Who could blame them. 80% of the provider budgets goes for salaries and insurance. (thats around $10.00/hr) and not great insurance. 20% of the budget goes for food, utililities, insurance, office supplies etc. those are fixed costs. They only place providers can cut is STAFF….this leaves our kids in the most vulnerable, unsafe situations. If they do this, they can expect a lawsuit based on Federal law, and rules and regulations. I doubt any of them even know the rules/regulations for Medicaid. 64% of that medicaid money is from the feds, 35% from the State. Delaware has never opted to get the other medicaid monies that our disabled were entitled too, because the State would have to chip a small percent….and these dimwits were too CHEAP! Now we have young people in group homes walking around toothless…cuz Delaware never got a medicaid grant to cover dental care.
What you should be doing is joining us in this: All that Medicaid stimulus package money should go into a Medicaid account of its own. Not to be co mingled with State funds (which is a federal violation), not to be used for anything other than its intended purpose. the disabled and the abled who have lost jobs and have no health care.
As the co-prime sponsor of HB75, I managed to personally get all those co-sponsors on board since there has been evidence and instances when the wishes of the hospitalized to allow visitors or enforce directives via the patients preference (while fully competent) have been denied. I was asked to run that bill since I led that charge in last sessions Health and Human Services committee hearings pointing out and debating those situations that compromise and deny the rights of individuals. It is necessary legislation and unfortunately we often have to legislate against attitudes that deny equal rights to everyone.
HB 60 is endorsed by the Nemours group, the American Heart association among other groups who realize the disastrous potential for consumption of artificial trans-fats. There is no exaggeration here and many other states are doing this. I will not expand this type of government restriction into the purview of private businesses (restaurants etc.) but feel we are certainly responsible for what harmful products we expose our children to in the public domain. You’ll notice the legislation does not overextend into private or parochial schools.
ElSom: you are right on target. The State Chamber of Commerce, the Delaware Public Policy Insitute aided and abetted by the Stooge Journal are precisely WHO keeps this State from progressing on any level with health care.
The Delaware Health Care Association is a fraud and a scam. They will send 7 to l lobbyists to work against single payer healthcare. The suits have Jack convinced the Romney Mass Plan is the way to go. Fact is that Plan has been horrible for Mass. and is costing twice the money. It kept the for profit health care companies, the big pharma companies in place running up the health care costs and did absolutely nothing to make health care affordable. The problem is simple: until there is Campaign Finance Reform and our legislators are not bought off and their campaign cofferes filled to the brim with corporate dollars…they will never work for us.
Even the best representative will at some point be compromised by these corporate rats and turn against the citizens.
The long term Ombudsman is understaffed and underfunded, they are absolutely unable to monitor the group homes for the disabled, or the nursing homes. The Big Nursing Homes do everything they can to keep family from seeing the patient or asking care related questions. If your name is not on their paperwork, they dont have to tell you anything. This is how they coverup of the dirty deeds they do. I know. I have been there. I work with the elderly in private care. I have been in these places, and see what goes on…..if you can keep your loved one at home, ….there isn’t one I would recommend….not one.
I so much agree with you on the stretched and cut budget of those areas, but the stretched and cut budget of DOE is not the “safety net budget” for this necessity to be turfed. EFFICIENCY of those Medicaid dollars have long needed to be addressed, and RECEIPT of those Medicaid dollars, better tracked. I go apoleptic when people who “should know”, don’t recapture the federal Medicaid reimbursement for our citizens’ purposes. My best case…working with a boys/young adult group home serving 80 kids. For YEARS, they just paid the pharmacy bill as it arrived. Imagine the accountants when I had a lil’ chat with them about the pharmacy and those kids? And other services….in truth, the accountants, or someone should have been fired, for the uncaptured reimbursement–but hey the bills were paid, and they were ignorant…HELLO…budgets are being blown…and needlessly. I’m just saying don’t misalign these costs to a wrong oversight area, when perhaps the correct oversight area may be far more savvy in seeing it funded.
On the Sussex County plan, I think 7 is a good number. Joanne is right, though, be VERY careful of too much representation on that level, which you very easily can have. Look northward, if you don’t believe me. We have that problem and most of those bumblers are more busy trying to look busy than doing anything meaningful…well for the citizens, that is.
I’d like to see if NCCo can be REDUCED, as it should. One rep from lower NCCo (canal as a boundary), or keep the boundary of the current dist 6 and 12 from Kent Co, but cap them at DE City for 12 and the sub-division mass on 896 (Rose Hill/Clear Creek/Brennan Estates, etc) for dist 6 and then divvy up the upper side of NCCo with the remaining districts. Expanding like they did was a mistake learned afterward and the extra salaries don’t help in this economy.
Cassandra asked whether posts of filed legislation were useful. This thread equates to a resounding ‘Yes’.
An awful lot of ground covered with lots of varying points of view, and little in the way of dueling talking points.
Keep ’em comin’!
I hate it when people who actually know what they’re talking about get on the blog. There’s just nothing to say back.
But I STILL want to know where all of these amendments for HB1 are.
I had the impression the last time I heard Gilligan talk about this that he had a few of them already. Is that wrong?
Joanne, public schools (and any other licensed food-serving institution) are already forbidden from serving arsenic and other poisons to children. Trans fat is currently a legally sanctioned way of imperilling their health – the science about it is quite sound. Kids can’t make the kind of informed choices that adults do about nutrition, so it’s up to schools not to serve them shit like that. And if it takes legislation to get their ass in gear, so be it.
Re HB 1: A lot of times, amendments to bills are not brought up or pre-filed until the day the legislation is considered on the floor. Some are not even pre-filed on that date, but rather introduced directly from the floor.
Some of it is playing ‘legislative chicken’, some of it can be that parties on varied sides of an issue are seeking to find a common-ground omnibus amendment, and some of it can be that many legislators are not as involved as one might wish while the General Assembly is not actually meeting.
Brian – HB 65 would actually add two at-large council members, so it wouldn’t affect the districts at all. (Redistricting after the 2010 Census will, but that’s still a little ways off.)
And Joanne @ 27 – quorums are rarely a problem for Sussex, so no wiggle room is needed. Or did I misunderstand what you were saying?
The backstory on that is that residents in eastern Sussex say they’re under-represented compared to the western side of the county. If you look at the coast vs. the western border with MD, both have three districts touching them – but one of them stretches all the way from Laurel to Fenwick Island across the southern border of the county.
Adding two at-large council seats might guarantee more representation from Lewes-Rehoboth-Milton-Angola, etc…. but just as easily, you could have two new council reps both hailing from Greenwood. That would piss the newbies off.
That will be a huge battle royale if it happens. Sussex has never experienced a true countywide race for any office of importance before.
Well, anon, if the bulk of the population growth is in eastern Sussex, then the redrawing of boundaries after the 2010 census would logically be reflected in the redrawn district lines at that point. As it presumably would w/the legislative districts.
The idea that the new districts would be at-large has set off El Somnambulo’s Mischief Alarm.
Hmmm, let’s see…Rethugs in control of Sussex County Council, check. Redistricting likely to dilute that control, check. Create 2 new at-large districts, bzzz-bzzz-bzzz. This will be an interesting test of Pete Schwartzkopf’s mettle as House Majority Leader.
A lot of times, amendments to bills are not brought up or pre-filed until the day the legislation is considered on the floor.
So for an intensely watched bill like HB1, this ends up denying those who have interest in this any targets while they aren’t in session too. I’m going to be really angry at these people if they don’t give us a chance to see what they are trying to do to this bill before they vote on it.
As for HB 65 — bypassing the irony of a Republican ASKING for bigger government — why wouldn’t they wait until the redistricting cycle to get this done? It can’t be more than 2 years away now, I think. Or is this a set up for two bites at the apple?
El Som and Cass (can I call you Cass?),
HB 65 or a version thereof has been going around Leg Hall for years. It’s got nothing to do with Republicans in charge or Democrats in charge…. that matters much less than positions on development, growth, the supremacy of the free market, etc.
Depending on who’s in control of redistricting… they could conceviably be redrawn to put Joan Deaver and George Cole in the same district. The pro-development people would love that.
Since they agree on about 99 percent of everything, one of them would probably run for an at-large seat. So HB65 could be a really good thing for the controlled-growth forces.
Lee Ann, any thoughts on this one? (We know you’ve got ’em!)
Anon, ‘Bulo agrees that it’s not really D’s vs R’s. ‘Bulo oversimplified. It’s really pro-development vs. controlled development and eastern Sussex vs. western Sussex. It’s Schwartzkopf/Bunting/Simpson vs. Adams/Venables/Booth.
In other words, it is really about the future of Sussex County. This next reapportionment and the fate of this legislation might well determine that.
Of course, ‘Bulo has been around a long time and still understands Sussex County about as well as he understands Mars, which may well be the home planet of Sen. Venables.
To ‘Bulo or anyone else –
JoAnne never got an answer to her question about HB64 (or if she did I missed it). My question is similar.
Why is this bill somehow a “special interest” bill? Will all Delaware small businesses be able to purchase coverage through the state pool?
Please forget about Denn’s previous bill. Forget about your holy grail of socialized medicine. According to ‘Bulo the Denn bill was killed, for whatever reason. I am simply interested in the pros and cons of the current bill.
El Somnambulo doesn’t know who HB 64 would or would not cover. Perhaps you should ask its sponsor, Rep. Booth.
If it offers bennies to some, but not all, small businesses, by definition, it is placing some interests above others.
And, your lemming talking point about ‘forget about your holy grail of socialized medicine’ notwithstanding, the bill uses exactly the same methodology the Denn bill employed: enabling small businesses to use the State’s buying power to purchase at the same group level.
Accordingly, ‘Bulo poses GA this question: Why should some small businesses be afforded this opportunity and not all others? And what the bleep does that have to do w/socialized medicine?
It’s Deaver v. Phillips, Cole v. Wilson, and the enigma is still Vincent.