Louisiana House Bill HB387

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/14
• Refer: 3/10/14
• Report Pass: 4/14/14
• Refer: 4/15/14

Caption

Provides relative to the payment of health insurance premiums for district attorneys (EG NO IMPACT LF EX See Note)

Impact

The implementation of HB 387 is significant as it directly affects the benefits available to district attorneys and assistants in the Sixteenth District, reinforcing support for public servants in their post-retirement. Advocates for the bill argue that such measures are essential for ensuring that those who have devoted long years to public service receive adequate support after their careers. The bill seeks to improve retention and encourage sustained service among district attorneys by providing better retirement incentives.

Summary

House Bill 387 establishes provisions for the payment of health insurance premiums for district attorneys and assistant district attorneys within the Sixteenth Judicial District of Louisiana. The bill states that any district attorney or assistant district attorney who retires with a minimum of 24 years of full-time service will have their group health insurance premiums fully covered by the district attorney’s general fund. This applies regardless of the retiree's age and outlines that the payments will adhere to the health benefits available during their retirement period.

Sentiment

The sentiment regarding HB 387 appears to be largely positive among legislators and advocates who support measures that enhance benefits for public sector employees. By extending health insurance coverage to veterans of the district attorney’s office, there seems to be a shared understanding of the need to honor their service. However, there are concerns regarding the financial implications of such benefits on taxpayers and the sustainability of funding the premiums through the district attorney’s general fund.

Contention

Notable contention around the bill may come from discussions about its fiscal impact. Critics could express concerns over the possible strain on the general fund allocated for district attorney operations, especially if additional funding is needed to accommodate pension costs. The bill's critics might argue that extending such benefits could set a precedent demanding similar provisions for other public service roles, prompting discussions around equity and budget allocations within state budgets.