[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6342408,"mediaKeyId","2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054","parentId",2255170,"title","Committee advances bill to create state apprenticeship office, exempts existing trade boards","audioSeconds",677,"startMs",714000,"endMs",1391000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054&start=714&end=1391","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054/thumbnail_714000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6342408/North-Dakota/Committee-advances-bill-to-create-state-apprenticeship-office-exempts-existing-trade-boards","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342408-ca03b14bbeb6a97d91315b023f7aed15/orig.mp4?Expires=1771147332&Signature=JptSJxpNr8B1Y~-nyAtNf8fYQ0vggNrwpncx80iIWaIrtvbR7dyVLFTed9fPTYaEhVmuUnNPF-Wmc7ENDsmAoi9D2NVpn-9yPdbQx86DniiknQWN7UwqSyvKslXq1IB6RUz7l0yg7UXG4kJRKcSYwGrkYFusPkps1u9HSqt8mJZirJI0lgbVnzs5iAM6MHUMybv8XkHspAkZHbrv1Ns89usyi8QMhbD~oYbd7v0YqvaMGCX73wMHiTRiPUVF5hFye1-Tw~2mcwN9VIoHSNRNRv5~Vdx0cQeoqyR5uqLxDqv1M4ANxaa2x3wpF7vZknvJOvm-pNnFsnfb7KVl8Xj7CQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","North Dakota State Legislature","date","2025-02-10T00:00:00Z","article","The Industry, Business and Labor Committee on Wednesday voted to send House Bill 1036 forward, as amended, to appropriations after adding language to preserve existing apprenticeship programs overseen by independent boards.

The bill would establish a state office to support and expand apprenticeship programs; Representative Jordan Koppelman, who worked on components of the measure, told the committee he sought a narrow amendment so the proposal would not “supersede the existing boards” that already manage trade apprenticeship programs such as the State Electrical Board’s program.

Committee discussion centered on two issues: whether the U.S. Department of Labor should retain final approval authority for registered apprenticeships, and which state agency should “house” the proposed office. James Schmidt, executive director of the State Electrical Board, told the panel the board has run its own education and apprenticeship oversight since 2018 and opposed giving USDOL final “rubber stamp” authority. “We have enough qualified people in the state to do that,” Schmidt said, describing the board’s education committee and program structure.

Phil Davis, Workforce Service Director for Job Service North Dakota, told lawmakers Job Service already works with the USDOL apprenticeship office and maintains a list of more than 100 registered sponsors employing and training about 1,750 apprentices statewide. Davis said Job Service is “well positioned to stand up this office” and would collaborate with the Department of Commerce, Department of Labor and other partners.

Representative Koppelman said the amendment was intended to reassure trade groups that the office would not displace existing boards. Several lawmakers expressed concern about long-term staffing and funding; Davis said the bill’s funding would become part of Job Service’s base budget if the office is created and added that the agency has experienced staff reductions since 2007 and would use the requested FTEs to staff the office.

After debate, the committee adopted Representative Koppelman’s amendment to exempt apprenticeship programs “that are under the management and oversight of other boards and commissions within the state.” Representative Koppelman then moved a “due pass as amended” recommendation and the committee approved the bill by roll call. The committee chair later said the amendment protects a program “that actually is working really well and can provide a model for the rest of this to follow.”

The committee record shows a close vote; the motion was recorded as passing with seven members in favor, six opposed and one recorded as an abstention. The bill was referred to appropriations.

Why it matters: The bill would create a state-level resource intended to expand apprenticeship pathways for employers and job seekers. Supporters argued a Job Service-based office could help employers set up apprenticeship programs and connect apprentices with training; trade boards and some committee members pushed back on giving the federal USDOL final control of state programs and sought to protect existing state-managed programs.

What’s next: With a due-pass recommendation as amended, the bill moves to the appropriations committee for consideration. The amendment directs that the state office not displace boards already overseeing trade apprenticeship programs.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Industry, Business and Labor Mon, Feb 10, 2025 8:30 AM-12:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","The Industry, Business and Labor Committee on Wednesday voted to send House Bill 1036 forward, as amended, to appropriations after adding language to preserve existing apprenticeship programs overseen by independent boards.","taxTitle","Industry, Business and Labor, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28894,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6342398,"Committee amends accumulator-bill; amendment removes grandfathered plans and drops fiscal impact",2134,6937000,9071000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054&start=6937&end=9071","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054/thumbnail_6937000.jpg","/articles/6342398/North-Dakota/Committee-amends-accumulator-bill-amendment-removes-grandfathered-plans-and-drops-fiscal-impact","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342398-f5fbc47a75b51f5187ea8b25bb58a97b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771147332&Signature=WO~VFLILUL7fFiKvDjfSF~Qhr6c6LGmnFuI0yQEkUXuKLQ3UaXJ~gy~iMOf8YhXtdIVBF0ah0lyXOEsbuV5mXmKsHenJSh81rwoujwgCHLC0s2Y4YD1Nft89HkBtYt6sCogDeQnMsDX2wgT1hr3RDG1PrDpQI0xUOY6eK4Ayd2~wK7Mdv0qUfW5~BJpOH7ULS9Fyanu5PTTT9epUkbUIiGdUyN5tN24O31cp3XgNF~x6bUS5KW55eCp1RTPFw8yeCjA4fzsZovP4oGph6ZXlXMDu0eOXVovWJHvndoIVpqvdNUUEtKKTJIpHRJj~Y8lM6XkZXU2iM5XbUuJbZ55ozQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The committee took extended testimony on House Bill 1216, which would prohibit co-pay assistance from being excluded from a plan’s deductible or out-of-pocket maximum (commonly called “copay accumulator” or “coupon accumulator” rules). Patient advocates and the American Cancer Society and others urged the committee to require coupon amounts be credited toward patients’ cost-sharing obligations, arguing that otherwise patients with severe illnesses may be left with unaffordable bills.

Insurers and trade groups opposed the measure as originally written and testified on practical and market effects. Witnesses from Blue Cross Blue Shield and Sanford Health Plan explained they do not receive coupon-dollar transaction detail from pharmacies or PBMs and that the coupon process often appears “invisible” to carriers at the point of sale; carriers said they see the full drug charge submitted by pharmacies and do not receive a separate, machine-readable credit for a manufacturer coupon. Industry speakers also warned of unintended consequences and asked for careful drafting.

The committee adopted an amendment from Representative Carls (recorded in committee as Representative Carls/Carls’ amendment) that removed “grandfathered” plans from the bill’s coverage; Rebecca Fricke, Executive Director of the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), told the committee Deloitte’s actuarial review of the amended bill showed no fiscal impact for PERS because the majority of PERS members are in grandfathered plans. Fricke said the original bill’s fiscal note had estimated roughly a 1.1% premium increase for PERS (about $9 million); with the amendment removing grandfathered plans the bill as amended had no fiscal impact for PERS.

Insurers and patient advocates continued to disagree on mechanics and effects: insurers said they could not track coupon payments in their systems and therefore carriers do not see coupon amounts applied at the point of sale; patient advocates argued coupons often act to steer patients to brand-name drugs with no generic alternative and leave patients exposed when carriers count only insured payments toward deductibles.

Why it matters: The bill addresses a contentious area of prescription-drug payment design—whether manufacturer coupons should reduce patient cost-sharing obligations. Carriers warned of technical difficulties and potential market distortions; patient groups said withholding coupon credit can leave patients with unaffordable out-of-pocket bills for specialty drugs.

What’s next: Following the adopted amendment (which removed grandfathered plans from application), PERS’ actuary reported no fiscal impact. The committee adopted a due-pass recommendation on the amended bill before leaving the item for future action or referral as appropriate.","Lawmakers debated House Bill 1216, which would require third-party manufacturer coupons to count toward patients’ deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. After testimony from insurers, PERS and patient advocates, the committee adopted an amendment excluding grandfathered plans; the amendment reduced PERS’s fiscal note to no financial impact.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6342402,"Committee rejects bill to mandate employer leave for legislators, citing business burdens",1103,2242000,3345000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054&start=2242&end=3345","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255170-74881feced16c135ad04d81be0712054/thumbnail_2242000.jpg","/articles/6342402/North-Dakota/Committee-rejects-bill-to-mandate-employer-leave-for-legislators-citing-business-burdens","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342402-f4d219c89a1b9e1372e57539958e8cbe/orig.mp4?Expires=1771147332&Signature=fN7Hi7N3zw5AgbEAnpsUp3K0Z5vRF305L0pJwzmoyEoT7tOsnpSQcMZSIb-gg9gfuIFttOmPC57PNSLgqjvnH~Qts04sXs-gQ449XyiywKl2gL1MUgAICqnUNBoDT6Gb8D9y8TzwrHMWWYmm4~5NpAl9khbERbp8j6UxnNfj3ZDo07im3acc~QqPDI8xhjQTPE2D2~tr3Ae4P64MpwsFc0rL3tZ084zUKH33XkEyWi9zVb4uU9-L~cbdxdF1mgg-bvhc1~z0lEikll~514xdsAB8IQz0ipjVxiWrFHa2qmkAgM-v5Ou17sBC43bUMiTBvw0P81Zd1RXeCNDaRPUulQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Austin Foss introduced House Bill 1495 to require employers to grant leaves of absence and certain employment protections for members of the legislative assembly. Foss said the measure would protect citizen legislators—farmers, teachers and other working North Dakotans—and lower barriers to service by safeguarding employment rights similar to protections given to servicemembers.

Committee members and witnesses questioned the bill’s impacts on employers, especially small businesses and industries requiring specialized employees. Andrea Fenwick of the Greater North Dakota Chamber testified in opposition, calling the mandate an added burden for businesses already struggling with labor shortages; she said employers could face high costs and difficulty finding temporary replacements, especially in rural areas and in specialized sectors such as healthcare and mining.

Lawmakers debated whether an employer mandate was the right approach. Representative Foss said he would be open to a threshold (for example, a 50-plus-employee exemption) to limit impacts on small employers; other members, including Representative Ruby and Vice Chair Osterly, said the bill would place an undue burden on employers and could discourage hiring or cause employers to be reluctant to allow staff to run for office.

Representative Shower moved a “do not pass” recommendation. After discussion the committee approved the do-not-pass recommendation on a roll call; the chair said the committee appreciated the bill’s intent but concluded the mandate would create significant hardship for employers. Representative Shower agreed to carry the bill to the floor as a do-not-pass report.

Why it matters: Proposals to protect employees who serve in a citizen legislature raise tradeoffs between increasing public-service access and imposing mandates on employers. Supporters argued the bill would expand who can serve in the legislature by reducing employer barriers; opponents said it would worsen hiring challenges and impose costs for businesses already citing labor shortages.

What’s next: The committee issued a do-not-pass recommendation; Representative Shower was selected to carry the bill forward with that recommendation.","House Bill 1495, which would have required employers to grant leave for employees serving in the legislative assembly with protections for pay and benefits, failed to advance after committee members and business groups warned of costs and staffing impacts; committee adopted a do-not-pass recommendation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee advances bill to create state apprenticeship office, exempts existing trade boards

Committee amends accumulator-bill; amendment removes grandfathered plans and drops fiscal impact

Committee rejects bill to mandate employer leave for legislators, citing business burdens