Committee hears testimony on bill to allow out‑of‑state second opinions; rolls measure to Friday

Senate Bill 12, which would ease access to out‑of‑state second opinions by allowing certain clinicians to provide telehealth consultations to New Mexico patients, drew patient testimony and regulatory opposition during its first hearing in the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee.

Sponsor Senator Cedillo Lopez opened with a constituent case: a patient who, after unsuccessful surgeries, sought virtual second opinions from nationally known specialty centers that declined because of New Mexico telehealth licensing requirements. The sponsor framed SB12 narrowly — to enable second opinions and consultations where travel would be dangerous or impractical — and asked the committee to consider amendments expanding the list of covered clinicians. The sponsor moved and the committee accepted an amendment to add dietitians to the list of covered professions.

The New Mexico Medical Board opposed the bill in committee testimony. Dr. Karen Carson, a pediatrician and current chair speaking for the board, said the board’s mandate is to protect the public and that “this bill will allow the unlicensed practice of medicine in New Mexico,” leaving harmed patients without board recourse. Former medical board medical director Dr. Steve Jankowski warned the committee that second‑opinion workflows usually require transfer of medical records and constitute a doctor‑patient relationship; he said New Mexico already offers an expedited telemedicine licensing path and that many out‑of‑state specialists already obtain New Mexico telemedicine licenses.

Other testimony described the bill’s intent as narrow: to permit second opinions for patients who cannot safely travel, and to let specialists advise a New Mexico clinician or the patient about whether in‑person care at a specialty center is needed. Dr. Denise Gonzalez, who described long experience in telemedicine and specialty networks, urged clearer statutory guardrails on scope and duration of care if the committee advances the bill.

After several hours of testimony and questions, the chair rolled the bill to the committee’s next hearing on Friday; sponsor Cedillo Lopez will be first on the agenda. The committee adopted the dietitian amendment (vote recorded in transcript as a roll call in favor). Committee members signaled a desire to craft clearer language on permitted scope, reimbursement, and the regulatory interplay with licensing and Medicaid payment rules before moving the bill forward.