Bill Overview
Title: Don Young Alaska Native Health Care Land Transfers Act of 2022
Description: This act directs the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to convey specified property in Alaska to certain nonprofit entities that support Alaska Native communities. Specifically, HHS must convey specified property in (1) Tanana, Alaska, to the Tanana Tribal Council for use in connection with health and social services programs; (2) Sitka, Alaska, to the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium for use in connection with health and social services programs; and (3) Anchorage, Alaska, to the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium for use in connection with health programs. These conveyances shall not require any consideration from, or impose any obligation, term, or condition on, the consortia or council or allow for any U.S. reversionary interest in the property. The consortia or council shall not be liable for any environmental contamination that occurred before these conveyances.
Sponsors: Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Alaska Native communities in Tanana, Sitka, and Anchorage
Estimated Size: 110000
- The bill involves conveyance of property to nonprofit entities supporting Alaska Native communities, which directly impacts those communities.
- The properties are located in Tanana, Sitka, and Anchorage, indicating geographic areas within Alaska where the impact will be felt directly.
- These communities use the properties for health and social services, suggesting the impact on the population involves healthcare and social wellbeing.
- Alaska Natives in these regions rely on nonprofit entities like the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium for healthcare services, hence indicating the direct beneficiaries of this legislation.
- Alaska's population as of 2021 was estimated at approximately 736,000, with Alaska Natives (American Indian and Alaska Native) making up about 15% of this population.
- The ongoing availability and expansion of healthcare services through these land transfers could potentially impact the health outcomes for these communities, which include roughly 110,000 Alaska Natives.
Reasoning
- This policy directly impacts Alaska Native communities by transferring land to nonprofit entities that provide health and social services. The primary focus is on areas around Tanana, Sitka, and Anchorage, meaning the most significant effects will be felt there.
- The transfer of property without financial burdens or environmental liabilities reduces operational costs and enhances resource allocation efficiency for these health service providers.
- Our interviews will reflect a diverse range of individuals, including those who are directly affected by this policy and those who are not, to assess the overall awareness and potential impact.
Simulated Interviews
Healthcare Administrator (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step in the right direction for addressing the healthcare needs of Alaska Native communities.
- Removes financial burdens previously associated with land use.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Community Health Worker (Sitka, Alaska)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The land transfer will enhance our capacity to provide essential services without worrying about overhead costs related to land.
- There is potential to improve community health outcomes significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired Elder (Tanana, Alaska)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I perceive this policy as a long-overdue initiative that will help maintain our community's health infrastructure.
- It's reassuring knowing that future generations will have better access to healthcare services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Public Health Researcher (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It will be interesting to study the impacts of land conveyances like this on healthcare outcomes.
- I think it's a positive policy that could serve as a model for other regions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Policy Analyst (Miami, Florida)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While this policy primarily benefits Alaskan communities, its success could influence federal policy design for indigenous lands.
- Programs like this promote self-determination and local governance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Teacher (Tanana, Alaska)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The potential improvement in health services could also benefit our school's health education programs.
- The policy will allow the community to focus on growth rather than survival.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental Lawyer (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy cleverly circumvents potential legal and financial hurdles for these nonprofits.
- Interesting legal precedent for future land use cases might be established.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that improves the health economy benefits my business indirectly, especially the focus on local issues.
- I hope this will build long-term infrastructures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
General Practitioner (Houston, Texas)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having been part of those communities, this policy would have made a significant impact on daily operations and service quality.
- It's a relief not to worry about land tenure implications for healthcare expansion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Student (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While not directly impacted, I'm interested in these kinds of policy shifts in land use for indigenous communities.
- It invigorates the discourse on devolvement of federal land control to local bodies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000 (Low: $200000, High: $800000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The impact of transferring government property to nonprofit entities that support Alaska Native communities can have significant social benefits, despite the minimal financial impact.
- Ensuring that the properties are utilized for health and social services may improve healthcare access and outcomes for Alaska Native communities.
- Potential liability issues are mitigated as the entities receiving the property are not liable for pre-existing environmental contamination.