[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:02] Good afternoon, everyone. We're in the House Committee on Health Care in the Great State of Oregon on Thursday, February 26th. It's a little after 3 p.m. Committee, we have two bills that we're going to work today. And I believe this will be our last meeting. Unless, oh, this is bad. That feels like sarcasm. Okay. We're going to start with Senate Bill 1568. I'm going to open a work session.
[0:31] Where we got?
[0:33] Chair, Vice Chair.
[0:36] Members of the committee.
[0:37] Senate Bill 1568 came.
[0:40] Pardon me.
[0:41] Came to the committee.
[0:42] From Senator Reynolds through the Senate.
[0:44] Early Committee on Early Childhood and Behavioral Health.
[0:47] This measure had its public hearing on the 24th.
[0:51] I believe that was Tuesday of this week.
[0:52] The measure as introduced or as.
[0:55] With the eight.
[0:56] Pardon me.
[0:56] The aye.
[0:56] And gross version of the measure makes changes to do it in lactation
[0:59] Council are coverage for Medicaid and health benefit plans and establishes the Oregon
[1:03] Paranatal Collaborative.
[1:04] That makes changes to Medicaid coverage, directs OHA to define qualification criteria by
[1:08] rule for birth and postpartum dulas by January of 28, specifies coverage requirements.
[1:14] It also does similar things for health benefit plan coverage.
[1:17] These changes all apply to both by January 1st of 2028.
[1:21] It establishes the Oregon Paranatal Collaborative at OHSU, the Oregon Health and Science University.
[1:27] The measure received a vote of 22 eyes and six nays in the Senate.
[1:32] There is an A3 amendment on Ollist for the committee's consideration.
[1:36] That replaces the measure substantially similar what it does as makes some technical changes
[1:40] around statutes pertaining to traditional health workers and where those are situated within
[1:44] statute.
[1:45] With the A3 amendments, minimal fiscal statement has been issued by LFO and no revenue impact
[1:51] statement has been issued by LRO, and with that, the committee, if you so choose to adopt
[1:57] that amendment, consent the measure onto the floor.
[2:00] Okay, represent Deal, can I get a motion please on the A3?
[2:04] Chair Nose, I move that we adopt the A3 amendment, Senate Bill 1568A, amendment dated February 20,
[2:16] 2526. If I should do a monthly adoption in the dash A3 amendment dated February 2026, is there any discussion on the A3 amendment?
[2:27] Not seen in it. Let's go ahead and call the roll.
[2:37] Is she excused?
[2:40] Is she excused?
[2:42] Is she excused?
[2:43] Is she excused?
[2:44] Hi.
[2:48] Yes.
[2:50] Are you sure Nelson?
[2:51] Hi.
[2:52] Here you are.
[2:53] You know, so what's yes, the dash A3 is adopted, vice-tradio can get a motion on the bills and men of
[2:59] please.
[3:00] If you're on else, I remove that we, uh,
[3:04] move Senate Bill 1568A as amended to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
[3:10] Vice-tradio moves Senate Bill 1568A to the floor of the house of the due pass recommendation as amended,
[3:15] is there any discussion on the bill as amended?
[3:20] I am not seeing any.
[3:22] Excited to see this go forward. Let's go ahead and call the roll.
[3:27] Yes.
[3:30] Yes.
[3:34] Excuse.
[3:41] Yes.
[3:45] Yes.
[3:50] I don't know.
[3:51] is there a carrier for the bill that we know of?
[3:55] Is there a house sponsor?
[3:58] So, that question, that's good.
[3:59] No.
[4:00] Just shout it out.
[4:01] Just wait.
[4:02] Grabber.
[4:03] Grabber wants to do it.
[4:05] I heard somebody out there said it.
[4:07] Representative, grabber wants to carry the bill.
[4:10] Yeah.
[4:10] Will that hurt?
[4:11] Will that represent a grabber?
[4:12] Be the carrier?
[4:13] Closing the work session on Senate Bill 1568A, opening a work session on Senate Bill 1558
[4:21] What have we got?
[4:23] Chair, Vice Chair, as members of the committee, Senate Bill 1598 came to the committee from
[4:27] Senator Reynolds by a way of the Senate Committee on Healthcare.
[4:31] The measure requires state-regulated health plans to cover specified preventive health
[4:36] services, including immunizations and authorizes the state public health officer to make recommendations
[4:41] for services to be covered and to issue standing orders for providers to dispense drugs
[4:45] and devices.
[4:47] This requires health plans to cover preventive health services that are prescribed under federal
[4:52] public health authority as of July 30th, 2025, as well as preventive health services recommended
[4:58] by the State Public Health Officer, which include immunizations.
[5:01] It also permits the State Public Health Officer to issue recommendations for preventive
[5:05] services, including immunizations and specifies what should be considered when issuing
[5:10] those recommendations, and it directs the Oregon health authority to publish them to those recommendations
[5:16] to their website. And specifies what information would be published there. It also permits
[5:21] the State Public Health Officer to issue or withdraw a standing order to prescribe a drug
[5:26] or device that would prevent mitigate or treat any significant public health concern.
[5:30] Simulates what would be considered and what the criteria are for your issuing the standing
[5:36] order and then stipulates that a standing order may not require a person to receive use
[5:42] or administer or withhold a drug or device.
[5:45] This past the Senate with a vote of 17 eyes and 11 nays.
[5:50] The measure, as introduced, has minimal fiscal impact and no revenue impact.
[5:54] There is a dash to amendment on oldest.
[5:56] You go ahead and explain it, because I feel like somebody wants to move.
[5:59] Okay.
[5:59] The dash to amendment was brought to the committee by Representative Deal.
[6:02] It would change that language around a standing order rather than saying it may not require a person to receive user administer a drug or a device or with hold a drug or device from a person.
[6:13] It changes that may to a shell and you do have paperwork for that as well.
[6:17] It's also minimal fiscal impact, you know revenue impact.
[6:21] Do you not believe I have anything else to say about this?
[6:24] Okay, represent do you want to go ahead and make a motion?
[6:26] Yes, Chair and I also I would like to
[6:29] little that we adopt the dash to a amendment dated February 25, 2026 to Senate Bill 1598. Vice-chair deal was the dash to
[6:37] Senate Bill 1598 dated February 25, 2026. Vice-chair deal was you like to talk a little bit about your amendment. Yes, basically it
[6:47] provides assurances that
[6:50] the public health officer
[6:52] Shellot
[6:53] mandate
[6:56] Show not mandate these drugs.
[6:59] The vaccines.
[7:00] Do you want to wax philosophical?
[7:02] Just to say.
[7:03] Let's wax philosophical.
[7:03] I'm why you want to go shallow as opposed to May.
[7:07] Because to the layperson, they mean different things.
[7:10] Okay.
[7:10] May not is not necessarily a prohibition.
[7:15] Well, yours may disagree.
[7:16] Based on the emails I saw earlier today.
[7:19] I do please.
[7:20] I do really clear.
[7:22] And we have had bills in here where we've changed May to Shell.
[7:25] I'm not sure if you don't may not and show them that's the difference.
[7:30] All right. Okay. Committee? All right. I'm going to take the liberty since we kind of anticipate that this might happen.
[7:38] And sort of preview that and then I'm going to invite legislative council to come forward.
[7:46] So yesterday, in anticipation of this amendment, I checked in with the key sponsor of the bill. Senator Reynolds is the key sponsor, but this is a bill that comes to us via the governor's office.
[7:59] And the governor, based on conversation that they've had with legislative council, I'll let them explain it, they'll do it probably a better job than I would do.
[8:10] Basically, have concluded that there's really no material difference in a may not or a shall not, and that the key word in those phrases is not the may or the shall, but the word not.
[8:23] Am I getting this kind of, I'm gonna let you explain it a little bit better?
[8:28] And so, colleagues, based on the feedback that I have from the sponsor of the bill and from the governor's staff,
[8:36] with all due respect to represent a deal, they would like us to not support this amendment, this change.
[8:41] So, I'll let you sort of explain the LCP's amendment, and then we'll see if there's any questions from the committee.
[8:47] Okay, I need to just yourself to the record.
[8:48] Great, good afternoon to chair, no vice chair's deal and now some members of the committee.
[8:53] For the record, my name is Victor Ruther and I'm the legislative council attorney responsible for drafting this bill and the amendment.
[9:02] The question presented essentially is whether there's any legal distinction between the use of may not or versus shall not in subsection eight of section two of this bill.
[9:16] The short answer is no, before dubbing into the details, I will acknowledge Representative
[9:26] Deals point that, as a matter of lay per people's interpretation, there is something
[9:32] intuitively, locally distinct, shallow feels much more robust.
[9:38] But as a legal matter, which is what is relevant in this building, there is the terms
[9:44] are substantive twins, a couple of bases for this determination or conclusion.
[9:52] There's an existing statute, or S174-100, which specifically expressly says, for the purposes
[10:00] of the Oregon Revised statute, subject to exceptions that are not relevant here, shall
[10:05] not, and may not, are equivalent expressions of an absolute prohibition.
[10:12] So that's quite persuasive, a subsidiary foundation for my conclusion is that our legislative
[10:23] council's bill drafting manual also addresses this topic reaches the same conclusion and
[10:30] has articulated a strong preference for may not over shell not when imposing prohibition
[10:39] on action as is the case in Subsection 8.
[10:43] So this is sort of the lawyerly consensus within our drafting department for how bills that are
[10:50] expressing something negative, as you can't do it, you all prefer that we do it.
[10:56] I only said it would be a teacher in college.
[11:00] Rosendeel is an engineer by training.
[11:03] I don't think we actually have any lawyers in this community yet.
[11:07] Yes.
[11:08] Okay, thank you for that explanation. Why don't you stand by and see, is there any question from
[11:12] members of the community? Just a statement. Go ahead. Go in and deal. So may and
[11:16] shell mean different things, but may not and shell not mean the same thing. I mean, that's my
[11:21] sorry, I'm an engineer. That's my sort of colloquial understanding of it.
[11:25] Correct. Yeah. All right. Okay. All right. There's a motion on the table. Can we get a
[11:39] then macron file?
[11:42] Excuse.igans.
[11:43] else? No.
[11:46] stainless fans
[11:47] no. A nice
[11:49] chair deal yes. Nice chair
[11:52] Nelson. No.
[11:55] Your notes.
[11:56] бес Consort No.
[11:57] Then Mehment is
[11:58] not neuropapted. A spite of us
[12:00] not taking him moment. Lee smoothed the
[12:01] bill. You don't have
[12:03] to. I'll get Nelson.
[12:05] I'm going to vote
[12:05] no, but I'll move it. That's right. Okay,
[12:07] respect for you.
[12:09] Go ahead. I appreciate that.
[12:09] Go ahead.
[12:09] I appreciate that.
[12:12] Chair Nose, make a motion to move Senate Bill 1598 to the floor.
[12:20] With the do pass recommendation, although I'm voting no.
[12:23] Vice Chair, you'll move Senate Bill 1598 as not amended to the floor with the do pass
[12:29] recommendation, even in a place to vote no.
[12:32] Is there any discussion?
[12:33] Represent gravity.
[12:34] Thanks, Chair.
[12:36] I had a thoughtful question come from a member of the public, and I
[12:40] I assume the other members of the public may also have the same question, and that question was.
[12:46] In the event that we have, if we were, if this law were in place, and this was 2020,
[12:53] and the governor issued an executive order requiring people to receive a vaccine in order
[13:00] to go into public space, certain public spaces, would this law have changed that?
[13:07] Meaning, if this law weren't placed now,
[13:10] can the public health authority or officer say?
[13:14] There's a standing order.
[13:15] You must receive this vaccine,
[13:17] to go into a school or a public space,
[13:22] or are those two things separate?
[13:24] Yes, there's a standing order that you can receive a vaccine.
[13:27] And now there's also this other thing on top of it,
[13:30] requiring you to have that vaccine
[13:32] to go in a certain space.
[13:33] Does that make sense?
[13:34] I think I understand the question.
[13:35] I'm not prepared to give you an answer.
[13:39] I'm really hoping I think Dr. Dean Silinger is online and maybe he feels comfortable answering that question. Hopefully that too many advance. There he is.
[13:51] No, this is surprise.
[13:53] So, yes, say your name for the record Dr. Silinger.
[13:57] Jernos, Vice Chair's Members of the Committee, Dean Saadlinger,
[14:01] Health Officer, and State of Columbia, I'll just in Oregon.
[14:05] I can't completely answer that question.
[14:07] I think the Standing Order authority that you are voting on now
[14:12] would preclude that authority from being used to compel someone
[14:17] to get a vaccination.
[14:19] What happened during the COVID pandemic,
[14:23] when we had a state and emergency,
[14:25] see there are different authorities that both the governor has and that are conferred on the
[14:31] H.A. That mandates to respond to COVID-19 or use and I don't think that this current bill
[14:42] would interfere with those because it's a completely different authority. Thank you.
[14:48] Okay, we're just going to do this. Thank you, Chair. So this just to clarify this bill does not
[14:54] grant you the authority to compel somebody, to get it back to get it back to you.
[15:01] That is my understanding and the understanding of, oh, H. A. I'm seeing ledge council nod. Do you want to get them up there for Bill Belt and Suspenders about it? Sure. Go ahead.
[15:16] For the record, Victor, Ruth, or Legislative Council, could you repeat the question? Go ahead, represent.
[15:22] I, yeah, I'm just asking, there's nothing in this bill that would grant the public health office to to compel someone to take a vaccine.
[15:33] that is correct okay I think that was a good question I'm glad you asked
[15:40] it yeah okay are we ready to vote now go ahead and call the roll
[15:51] Yes.
[15:52] Yes.
[15:53] Is that an emergency fire?
[15:54] She's excused.
[15:58] Yes.
[15:59] I apologize to Sam.
[16:01] Hi.
[16:02] I scared you.
[16:03] No.
[16:05] I scared you.
[16:07] Yes.
[16:09] You're not scared.
[16:09] You're not scared.
[16:10] You're not scared.
[16:11] You're not scared.
[16:11] You're not scared.
[16:19] Yes.
[16:19] You're not scared.
[16:20] report.
[16:22] Oh, let me know.
[16:23] Right on.
[16:24] Okay.
[16:24] Good to know.
[16:26] Notice I'm going to already part of served, closing the work session on Senate Bill 1598.
[16:34] Committee.
[16:36] I'm sorry we haven't been able to get to various informationals that I had planned, because
[16:40] you know, this is an overachiever committee, but given the sort of busyness of this session
[16:47] and the last minute changes to Community Schedule, we haven't been able to do that.
[16:53] The next time we'll be together, we'll be in June, and we'll try to have some of the
[16:59] information that I had hoped we'd be able to have be part of that.
[17:03] We'll also get an update on anything that's going on with HR1 implementation and anything
[17:09] that's going on with implementation of the rural health grant that we heard about in December
[17:16] in January. Other things too, maybe. But for sure we'll have a focus on that. It's been a
[17:24] pleasure serving with all of you. I think with that, I want to thank staff and the public. And we are adjourned.