[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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",[32,76,88,100],{"_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",6283237,"mediaKeyId","2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b","parentId",2589252,"title","Senate committee advances package of workers’ compensation bills after extended debate; insurers and employers warn of cost risks","audioSeconds",2741,"startMs",3225000,"endMs",5966000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b&start=3225&end=5966","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b/thumbnail_3225000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6283237/Arkansas/Senate-committee-advances-package-of-workers-compensation-bills-after-extended-debate-insurers-and-employers-warn-of-cost-risks","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6283237-f0beac88ec45b21dc11aa681ae3c488a/orig.mp4?Expires=1775956642&Signature=kguIlSTK6JMBX~y3jy-uo7d2dpmksO9bJCPDK1Z3eS24B3QkWGYxcVtLe0QHfl9o8ljG0cis2skzvq71J0QUZ0~fcl4pM9Nk3915x6bJELc3eKG6M5viysa0q3EBFaSQy9Mc5kqUzD9iCETKfPDtUPWZaG4himnWlCsqhIInHgogduOH~iiKeT8GRooL6vw4A6f9K~aCgk~L-CXUzh4v1O46kYJppEjH~zroXefMBExWzMgC7ebvbgC-176kCPUyID5qhlt5ZlK1Xlepm96MxuF5-nxpQtfgaDWBn2xnOEIrOVzcW7LuJNqV5cu-PJYfe~uCDthEFl7qWeSBSHgvbg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Arkansas Legislature","date","2025-03-12T00:00:00Z","article","The Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee voted to advance multiple bills amending Arkansas’ workers’ compensation system after several hours of testimony from employer groups, insurers, attorneys, medical providers and the state Workers’ Compensation Commission.

Sponsor Sen. Dan Peyton presented a package that he said was intended to recalibrate parts of the system to improve injured workers’ access to specialists and to update benefit calculations for higher‑wage workers. The committee passed the package by separate motions and recorded votes (by voice vote and committee roll calls where noted) to move the bills out of committee.

What the major bills do

• SB 288 — Change of specialist physician: Sponsor Peyton said SB 288 would allow an injured worker to request a change of specialist physician no more than once a year, limited to specialists within the workers’ compensation network unless the claimant can demonstrate a bona fide preexisting doctor–patient relationship. Peyton framed the bill as completing a pair of measures (one addressing primary care and this one addressing specialists) and said it would not allow “doctor shopping” outside network rules. The committee heard both supporting testimony from treating physicians who said workers should be able to see specialists they trust and a sustained opposition from employers and employers’ groups who argued it would prolong claims and increase costs. The committee voted to pass SB 288; the transcript records committee approval and an oral announcement that the bill passed.

• SB 285 — Maximum benefit and replacement-rate change: SB 285 would raise the maximum average‑weekly‑wage base used in many workers’ compensation calculations and increase the replacement rate from 66 2/3 percent to 70 percent. Supporters, including injured‑worker advocates and some claimants who testified, said higher‑wage employees and professionals — for example, police officers and nurses — receive payments that are far below their normal take‑home pay and that the 66 2/3 cap is increasingly inadequate. Opponents — including the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce and the Arkansas Self Insured Association — warned that the bill would materially increase insurance costs and cited NCCI (National Council on Compensation Insurance) analyses that projected notable rate impacts. Committee discussion focused on stated tradeoffs between improving income replacement fairness for higher‑paid workers and employer premium impacts. The committee voted to pass SB 285 by voice vote and a subsequent roll call procedure during which members’ positions were recorded.

• SB 286 — Scheduled injury valuation flexibility: SB 286 would permit the Workers’ Compensation Commission to adjust scheduled‑injury awards to account for circumstances where a listed impairment has an outsized effect on a worker’s ability to return to their former job (for example, a one‑eyed worker in a career that requires excellent binocular vision). Supporters said the change gives adjudicators discretion to fairly address durable, career‑ending consequences of certain impairments. Opponents expressed concern over introducing variability into a schedule designed to standardize awards; the committee moved the bill forward.

Opposition, fiscal concerns and agencies’ input

Business groups — represented in testimony by Carol Worley (legislative chair, Arkansas Self Insured Association) and Randy Zook (president, Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce) — said the bills would increase employers’ costs and cited industry studies and NCCI preliminary analyses that indicated substantial potential premium impacts (NCCI figures were discussed in testimony as showing an estimated direct impact up to about 9.9% for certain bills and other impacts summarized as 4.4–5.8% in different analyses). Employers noted Arkansas’ current standing among states for competitively low workers’ compensation premiums and cautioned against moving to higher statutory caps that could affect economic development decisions.

The chairman of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission, Dale Douthat, testified that the commission had requested financial‑impact studies from NCCI and that adoption of the bills would likely increase costs to employers, raise litigation, and potentially require additional staff at the commission. Douthat said the commission was willing to participate in joint, negotiated solutions between labor and management and had previously convened forums to try to find compromises.

Claimant‑side testimony and examples

Attorneys and injured‑worker advocates argued the bills would correct imbalances. Attorney Jason Hatfield urged the panel to permit more equitable access to specialists; claimant Steven Keeling offered personal testimony that delays and coverage denials left him without recommended surgery for 17 months. Attorney Eddie Walker, who described decades representing injured workers and serving as a former workers’ compensation judge, supported several measures to restore benefit levels and argued Arkansas’ prior reforms (Act 7 96 in 1993) had shifted the balance too far toward employers.

Committee action and next steps

The committee adopted motions to pass the bills discussed on the workers’ compensation agenda. Sponsors and the commission chair discussed obtaining and circulating more complete NCCI financial impact studies for the individual bills; the chairman of the commission said he had requested expedited analyses and would provide them to the committee when ready. Several members asked for follow‑up fiscal information and encouraged stakeholders to convene jointly to negotiate potential compromise language. The transcript records committee passage of SB 288 and SB 285 (voice votes and follow‑up roll calls), and SB 286 also passed. A related bill on attorney fees (filed as a separate item) was discussed and then pulled for amendment and further work; the sponsor asked to pull it down for revision rather than proceed to a final vote in the hearing.

Why it matters: The bills shift legal and financial parameters of Arkansas’ workers’ compensation system, with direct effects on injured workers’ income replacement, employers’ premium costs, and the administrative workload at the Workers’ Compensation Commission. Committee members asked for NCCI impact studies and urged joint negotiations among stakeholders before broader floor action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Public Health Welfare And Labor Mar 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee voted to advance multiple bills amending Arkansas’ workers’ compensation system after several hours of testimony from employer groups, insurers, attorneys, medical providers and the Workers’ Compensation Commission.","taxTitle","PUBLIC HEALTH, WELFARE AND LABOR COMMITTEE - SENATE, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Arkansas","taxId",21193,"location","Arkansas","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},6283242,"Committee approves EMS licensure compact to align Arkansas with neighboring states",2957,1349000,4306000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b&start=1349&end=4306","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b/thumbnail_1349000.jpg","/articles/6283242/Arkansas/Committee-approves-EMS-licensure-compact-to-align-Arkansas-with-neighboring-states","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6283242-03a8627b27b76dcb6aa67f2c6633b680/orig.mp4?Expires=1775956642&Signature=ZZvSW1~86zhTprISJR5c790aLj9E3rziDOKYQMf1PnG6ChM4KESsL926Imu9dXleAifgkExj1wVEag16szwFqoR7~9CAp-joMXb8ixA~xx5nCaTvQ3j4hAtwjiSmnqAwVA0~f0ZwE6FveQ8HvZ-IpbcI2rDkan14lR78YBNh7zs-VejGKuQ47RcmCRGaPWyh1iI4wiriWszPkMdlZtUz~HW8OdcoXHJRq~DeNuEwAPHFcyCa67B0TwJBZSmlW8K2TD5LMkkpqNZRV4TwXzy3bT1Nbua0ckI7hR9cx9hJPcHGZm0Zu4ln4JivqsrTxtuutw2HQGSOCBM1r3gjfvc2ig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee approved a bill to adopt the EMS licensure compact after testimony from Dr. Brandon Morchetti, an emergency medicine and EMS physician who serves as medical director for about 2,000 licensed EMS professionals in the state.

Representative Lee Johnson (District 47) introduced the measure and asked Dr. Morchetti to explain the compact. Morchetti told the committee the compact has been enacted in 24 states and that all six of Arkansas’ bordering states participate; Arkansas’ absence from the agreement isolates the state and, he said, “has been a threat to our public safety, emergency preparedness, and emergency response.” He said the compact would let licensed paramedics and EMTs from other compact states operate in Arkansas during routine cross‑border calls and in emergencies, and would make Arkansas “a good neighbor” to border states.

Committee members asked how Arkansas would be represented on the compact’s interstate commission and who would handle compliance. Morchetti said a member state receives a seat on the commission, typically filled by the state EMS section chief and appointed by the governor; each state has equal voting rights on the commission. He said the compact language provides for state presence for compliance matters and delegates rulemaking authority to the agreed compact commission with administrative oversight through the legislature and the state licensing authority.

No public witnesses opposed the bill. Following brief committee discussion, Representative Johnson closed for the bill, a motion to pass was made and seconded, and the committee approved it by voice vote.

Why it matters: Supporters said joining the compact would facilitate mutual aid across state lines, especially in border areas, reduce administrative friction when EMS personnel cross state lines, and enhance emergency preparedness. The committee record shows the bill passed out of committee; specific fiscal or implementation details were not discussed in the testimony on file.","The committee voted to pass legislation joining the multistate Emergency Medical Services (EMS) licensure compact; supporters said enactment would let Arkansas EMS personnel operate across borders and aid emergency response in border regions.",{"_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},6283247,"Senate committee clarifies medical-emergency language for pregnant patients; HB1610 passes",1959,2046000,4005000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b&start=2046&end=4005","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b/thumbnail_2046000.jpg","/articles/6283247/Arkansas/Senate-committee-clarifies-medical-emergency-language-for-pregnant-patients-HB1610-passes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6283247-c99ffa9d3b61b6a88e0d2c31a863e4f5/orig.mp4?Expires=1775956642&Signature=BfuhTjtpQdKTzt2j4SEQ6XCIsIxZstVSIb~WLGCKzu3RxMvsKw~UunCX35edD19k6QClyQdqndHx-6O8lbo4ByEV6WQqJfkoxWqAEMOcZrhffrEzNxR11fkP2kqPmS7lvyH5hd6bdJko2V8FpCCoyjkWU2OhRu0cQmQEhI6s-rNTSL2S3uYu5gIdwShMjd-QuynbYa3N~T66tJ8frg93ck6eOxoy6-EF7j~QZVgmQKxShm0Bo6tut1N9t~fXH4QzWuuJlMdcKak7mUcKwhvDvLUloLJ6mhkqS5k3x8nKGGg3j215YdT1qdZLB1iGBhL-ywpJiSc8t4YcXfJi6WwXjw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee voted to pass House Bill 1610 after sponsor Sen. Jimmy Hickey described the measure as a technical clarification to the state code affecting care for pregnant women.

The bill replaces the word “abortion” with “termination of a pregnancy” in the statutory definition of a medical emergency and adds language protecting physicians who act “in good faith” when treating life‑threatening complications of pregnancy. Sen. Jimmy Hickey, Arkansas Senate, told the committee the change aligns multiple code sections and clarifies when treatment aimed at preserving a pregnant woman’s life is permitted.

Hickey said the change responds to confusion created by two prior acts on the books, and he walked members through the new phrasing that defines a medical emergency as a condition that, in reasonable medical judgment, “complicates the medical condition of a pregnant woman to the extent that termination of a pregnancy is necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman.” He also said the measure specifies that the medical action be undertaken by “a reasonably prudent qualified physician knowledgeable about the case.”

Committee members asked a few clarifying questions but heard no testimony for or against the bill. No speakers testified publicly. Hickey closed, and the chair called the motion; the committee approved the bill by voice vote and passed it from committee.

The bill’s sponsor emphasized the intent was clarification, not to change the underlying medical standard. Because the committee recorded the passage by voice rather than by a roll‑call tally, the committee minutes show the motion carried and the bill advanced.

Why it matters: The change is narrowly worded but affects how physicians and hospitals interpret emergency exceptions in statutes governing treatment of pregnant patients. Supporters said the wording reduces potential confusion for clinicians responding to life‑threatening obstetric complications.","The Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee approved House Bill 1610 to change statutory language that defines a \"medical emergency\" for pregnant women, replacing the word \"abortion\" with \"termination\" and clarifying physician good-faith protections.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6283232,"Anesthesiologist‑assistant licensure bill fails in committee after contested hearing",2244,8552000,10796000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b&start=8552&end=10796","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2589252-f51bd173fb0aef2859ff05f12d44375b/thumbnail_8552000.jpg","/articles/6283232/Arkansas/Anesthesiologistassistant-licensure-bill-fails-in-committee-after-contested-hearing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6283232-b2512f8a8e59cfa5454e34ec4c74378c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775956642&Signature=aBcWlW708ussAAuEvvpwdQQ69YsHbN6ySEEYQ~hpc0GAm7~T7YoxxVu4VnLUXYTTyqumHlXpuHThQCXxtY1QYbxYlSRhYVjn2ZukHRPZWKIBXaBHALHvGjg~rmkPuVpSkuHE74fagXbvfowdknWdIK~OnWbq8qBwPTkOG-5MVU-JH2NDUZydpZFItX8VniEEyNyOkzfszE5~Lc1ZlyQ3DhyBOKInFwKs5Yk6XRl~08xHCDOKKCLBgz7ic4S~go7fraI2pd~Rt2Eg9Beft-PBjHvWXsW8alf~nI0hT1ywwZPrhxEj0phrkNvNeTVnpKQLYmQVwnyKHbELX-UpDDQzaQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee declined to advance House Bill 12‑51, a bill that would have established licensure and a scope of practice for anesthesiologist assistants (AAs) in Arkansas.

Representative Lee Johnson introduced the bill and called certified anesthesiologist assistant Jennifer Stever to testify about training and practice. Stever described the AA education model (master’s‑level accredited programs, affiliation with medical schools, clinical rotations of more than 2,000 anesthesia‑specific clinical hours, and ongoing certification requirements) and said AAs work alongside anesthesiologists and certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) in many jurisdictions. She said licensure would allow Arkansans trained as AAs to return to the state and help address workforce shortfalls in perioperative anesthesia teams.

Opposition testimony came from the Arkansas Association of Nurse Anesthetists and multiple CRNAs and anesthesia business owners. Opponents — including Mark Donovan and Brad Pitts — emphasized differences in background and clinical preparation (CRNAs typically hold a bachelor of science in nursing, multiple years of ICU experience, and doctoral‑level training in anesthesia in Arkansas’ programs) and said the AA model adds a master‑level provider who must be medically directed by anesthesiologists. Opponents argued that the bill would increase anesthesia costs for hospitals and patients, add regulatory burdens, increase fraud and compliance risk in a medical‑direction model, and provide limited workforce benefit because most AA positions would concentrate in urban centers rather than expanding rural access.

Committee members questioned supervision, on‑site availability of supervising anesthesiologists, and whether AAs would practice in ambulatory settings or only in perioperative suites. Supporters said AAs always practice under an anesthesiologist who is immediately available and that AAs work in surgery suites, obstetrics, and other monitored settings. Opponents countered that a medical‑direction model requiring on‑site availability of a supervising anesthesiologist is uncommon in many Arkansas settings and that licenses and new provider types would increase administrative and subsidy costs for hospitals.

After debate the committee took a roll‑call on HB 12‑51 and the bill failed to receive the votes necessary to advance. The transcript shows members calling votes individually; the chair announced the bill did not pass and the committee adjourned. The transcript records requests for fiscal impact statements and notes from earlier in the meeting that some bills were held pending fiscal analyses from state agencies.

Why it matters: Supporters framed the bill as an option to shore up anesthesia staffing; opponents said Arkansas already produces CRNAs and that the AA model would increase cost and complexity without meaningfully improving rural access. The committee vote leaves the state’s current practice model unchanged.","House Bill 12‑51 to authorize licensure of anesthesiologist assistants (AAs) was defeated in committee following extensive testimony from supporters seeking to widen anesthesia workforce options and opposition from nurse‑anesthetists who warned of increased costs and limited benefit in Arkansas.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate committee advances package of workers’ compensation bills after extended debate; insurers and employers warn of cost risks

Committee approves EMS licensure compact to align Arkansas with neighboring states

Senate committee clarifies medical-emergency language for pregnant patients; HB1610 passes

Anesthesiologist‑assistant licensure bill fails in committee after contested hearing