A proposal that would require the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services to seek a waiver from the federal government to restrict the use of financial assistance paid to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families recipients failed to clear the Legislature's Joint Budget Committee on Thursday.
The committee's 24-14 vote on the amendment, proposed by Rep. Jim Dotson, R-Bentonville, fell five votes short of the 29 required for approval in the 56-member committee.
The state spends $13 million to $14 million in federal block grant funds a year providing financial assistance to needy families, who can receive the aid only for up to two years, Bryan Hicks, an assistant director for financial management at the department, told lawmakers.
About 9,950 families benefited from the program between July 2014 and June 2015, and the monthly cash payment is based on an eligible household's size -- ranging from $81 for a single person to $457 for a family of nine, Steve Guntharp, an assistant director for the department, said after the committee's meeting.
Dotson's proposed amendment to the Workforce Services appropriation bill -- House Bill 1017 -- would require the department to request a U.S. waiver by Oct. 1 to limit the use of the program's financial assistance to the purchase of "goods and services that are considered essential and necessary for the welfare of the family."
Dotson proposed limiting allowable expenses to such things as food, clothing, housing, utilities, child care and incidentals such as transportation, medicine and medical supplies or equipment not covered by either Medicaid or the recipients' health care plans.
The proposal also would restrict cash withdrawals from electronic benefit transfer card accounts.
After the committee meeting, Guntharp said department officials are uncertain whether the federal government has granted similar waivers to other states.
The U.S. bars recipients from spending the aid in any liquor store, casino or gambling establishment or any retail establishment that provides "adult-oriented entertainment in which performers disrobe or perform in an unclothed state for entertainment," he said.
Dotson said he proposed the amendment because "I was kind of shocked to find that we just give cash out."
He said his aim is making sure "we have transparency and accountability in how we spend taxpayer dollars. My intent in the legislation is to make sure that cash is not distributed without some level of accountability."
He told lawmakers that his request for a federal waiver "is not changing the qualifications for an individual to receive rental assistance, or utility assistance or whatever it happens to be.
"All this is doing is, similar to SNAP benefits, putting restrictions on TANF funds that they can only be used for the intended purpose, which would be maybe a direct payment to a utility company for whatever amount they are qualified to receive for utilities," Dotson said. SNAP stands for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as food stamps, in which the government provides poor people with money to buy food.
Sen. Joyce Elliott, D-Little Rock, who voted against the amendment, said, "It is a small amount of money to help people with big needs, and I think we don't think about that sometimes."
"I would just like this body to respect the right and respect the fact that if you are poor that is not synonymous with stupid," she said.
Sen. Linda Chesterfield, D-Little Rock, added that she hoped the federal government would have better sense than to approve the waiver request.
Dotson said Thursday afternoon that he'll likely ask the committee again Tuesday to approve his amendment.
IN-HOME SERVICES SALE
The Joint Budget Committee voted Thursday to add an amendment to the Department of Health's operations appropriation bill for fiscal 2017 to require that proceeds from selling the department's in-home services program to a private provider be used to help reimburse the department for expenses related to the transition.
The bill is House Bill 1025.
The amendment -- requested by Gov. Asa Hutchinson -- would allow the state's chief fiscal officer to put any money left over into the state's rainy-day fund. The money could then be transferred to any fund authorized by the General Assembly or put toward General Improvement Fund projects.
How much the state will net from the program's sale has not been determined, said Jake Bleed, a spokesman for the Department of Finance and Administration.
The amendment also allows the health director to make a one-time payment of up to 10 percent of the net proceeds to the in-home services employees who remain with the program until the transition is complete.
Last month, five companies and a business operator submitted proposals to the state to buy the in-home health care operations. The program, started in 1981, offers hospice, home health care, personal care and in-home health care services. Most patients pay for the services through Medicare or Medicaid, though some use private insurance.
A NEW BUILDING?
Sen. Bart Hester, R-Cave Springs, questioned Thursday whether the state needs to buy property near the state Capitol and construct a building for the Department of Insurance.
He raised the question after the Senate approved an amendment to the finance department's Building Authority Division appropriation bill -- Senate Bill 113 -- to allow the division "from time to time as may be necessary" to request a transfer of funds from the Insurance Department's trust fund to provide up to $2.8 million for land acquisition and building construction.
Hester later said he's heard speculation "about this big new insurance building" on a former gas station property, north of the Capitol Hill apartments.
Joint Budget Committee co-Chairman Sen. Larry Teague, D-Nashville, said the Building Authority Division is interested in buying property near the Capitol for a building "that would house, as I understand it, the Insurance Department, Securities [Department] and the Bank Department.
"They tell me that's about $2 million in rent savings, and there is the money in the trust fund to pay for it," he said.
Bleed said "the state has not purchased any land for a future state office building in the vicinity of the Capitol. It's something the state is looking at, in accordance of the Capital Area Master Plan."
"However, we are still considering the feasibility of the project. The state has not yet determined whether a project will be cost effective, its size or scope, or which agencies would be relocated as a result," Bleed said in an written statement. "The Insurance Department has looked at acquiring properties along Third Street near the Capitol. However, DFA-Division of Building Authority would be handling any future projects, and DFA has not yet begun negotiations on any property. This is very preliminary.
"We don't have any firm numbers on how much a building would cost, which agencies it would house or when construction would begin. We also don't have an estimate on potential cost savings. The final goal of this project is government efficiency and cost-savings for the State. The project will not begin unless and until Gov. Hutchinson can be convinced that it will create savings for the taxpayers. Without strong assurances for significant future cost savings, this project is unlikely to proceed further," Bleed said.
A Section on 04/29/2016