Dr. Turner — Named as a technical expert present for questions on the rule docket.
Dr. Hahn — Named as a technical expert present for questions on the rule docket.
Steven Tanner — Called on after the follow-up question; appears to be asking a question about the docket.
Steven Tanner — Raises a question about the section on documents incorporated by reference and disclosure of information.
Steven Tanner — Addresses Mr. Larson with a question about the rule document.
Steven Tanner — Explains concern about HIPAA and the stricken disclosure language.
Steven Tanner — Acknowledges the department's explanation and yields to the next member.
Steven Tanner — Introduced as the next questioner.
Steven Tanner — Says the committee received the rules late and asks why the department did not walk members through the changes earlier.
Steven Tanner — Continues the question to Mr. Larson about the timing of the rule review.
Steven Tanner — Called on for a follow-up; likely a garbled reference to a member.
Steven Tanner — Called on to ask about restrictions on daycare facilities in the rule document.
Richard Cheatum — The speaker says the answer and explanation being given would be very similar to the one previously provided for Representative Kaler, using Kaler as the comparison point for the department’s explanation of the stricken language.
Mr. Larson — Explained that the blue-stricken material is a reorganization, that the rules are longstanding, and that public notice-and-comment occurred. He also said some child care-related provisions were removed because the legislature changed the law.
Mr. Larson — Continued explaining that the public had not raised concerns and that child care-related provisions were removed after legislative changes.
Mr. Larson — Said the notice was issued January 6th and one rule had to be eliminated because it was not supported by law.
Mr. Larson — Responded that no disease is added without legislative approval and that incorporation by reference does not reduce legislative authority or state sovereignty.
Mr. Larson — Explained that incorporation by reference does not add requirements beyond legislative authority.
Mr. Larson — Reminded the committee that public comment is available annually for rules across the state.
Mr. Larson — Helped locate the rule text and described the stricken 'inspection right of entry' language.
Mr. Larson — Explained that the stricken entry language is already covered by statute, specifically Section 56-109.
Mr. Larson — Mr. Larson emphasized that administrative rules must be grounded in clear, express statutory authority and that his role as a lawyer is to ensure every rule can be justified by statute. He warned that programs sometimes make changes without sufficient legal review, and explained that rules do not automatically disappear from the code, but they become invalid if they conflict with statute. He concluded by stressing that statute always trumps rule and that rulemaking review must stay within legislative authority.
David Leavitt — Requested a question for Mr. Larson.
David Leavitt — Asked whether the rules and incorporated-by-reference material would reduce state autonomy or sovereignty.
David Leavitt — Was thanked by Mr. Larson after asking about sovereignty and oversight.
David Leavitt — Asked for clarification on Rule 65, investigation and control of reportable diseases.
David Leavitt — Was addressed by Mr. Larson regarding the statutory basis for removing the entry language.
David Leavitt — Thanked the department and said he had received emails and attended public comment meetings.
David Leavitt — Asked for clarification on section 50 and the page references for reportable or restrictable diseases, conditions, or reporting requirements.
David Leavitt — Representative Leavitt is called on and then responds by saying legislators need better tools and knowledge before voting, expressing opposition to the motion.
David Leavitt — Representative Furman first asks for clarification on assessment fee revenue figures, noting a possible mismatch between a slide showing $15 and a verbal reference to $11; the response clarifies that the figure is $11.75 per member per month and that the slide refers to $15 million in assessment fee revenue. Furman then shifts to asking whether disenrollment due to affordability was driven more by the loss of enhanced tax credits or by carrier premium increases, prompting an explanation of the factors behind the increase in net premium and affordability-related disenrollment.
Unidentified committee member — Said they did not receive the summer email and wanted more time and clarification to understand what they were voting on.
Charlie Shepherd — Asked for clarification on whether the rewritten reporting language changes who is required to report.
Charlie Shepherd — Continued asking whether the rule changes who must report and whether the department has resources to investigate and confirm diagnoses.
Charlie Shepherd — Pressed for a step-by-step explanation of what changes in practice under the revised rule.
Charlie Shepherd — Asked for confirmation that the rule changes are only a reorganization and not a substantive change.
Charlie Shepherd — Moved to approve the docket.
Charlie Shepherd — The speaker says he has to trust Jared on the rule changes.
Charlie Shepherd — Asked whether a rule remains in effect until the committee revisits it after a statutory change.
Charlie Shepherd — Joked that he did not mean to prolong the meeting.
Charlie Shepherd — Joked about taking back a quarter after Mr. Larson said he had been 'fed a quarter.'
Mike Moyle — Representative Moyle joked about the chairman limiting his questions and quipped that one question mark equals one question, then shifted into the substance of the discussion by noting that the conversation was getting into the details of the reportable disease program and inviting Dr. Hahn to explain how the program works in more detail.
Dr. Christine Hahn — Dr. Christine Hahn identified herself as the state epidemiologist and explained that section 20 still requires reporting, but the rewrite is intended to consolidate existing language without changing obligations. She clarified that the table and paragraph are meant to centralize language that was previously repeated under each disease, especially the investigation and restriction requirements, so the bill focuses the consolidated language on diseases that need to be restricted.
Jared — Jared is discussed as the person responsible for understanding and tracking the rewrite, including where stricken language was moved or reinserted. The speakers express trust in him to handle the rule-tracking work and note that he has been hired to do it on a full-time basis.
Dustin Manwaring — Representative Leavitt was referenced in connection with the motion and then proposed an alternate motion to hold the item for a week.
Dustin Manwaring — Representative Leavitt proposed a substitute motion to hold the item for a week.