Committee rejects bill to license naturopathic doctors in Arkansas

The House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee on April 2 rejected Senate Bill 117, a measure to license naturopathic doctors and expand their permitted practice in Arkansas.

Supporters said licensure would expand access to preventive and integrative care in a state with chronic health burdens. Senator Clint Penzo (sponsor) and Representative Wayne Long, R-39, told the committee licensing would let qualified practitioners work openly and permit insurance reimbursement. Mamie Burris, a naturopathic doctor who testified for the bill, said, “Licensing qualified naturopathic doctors in Arkansas will increase access to this safe, effective form of care and provide Arkansans with another option.”

Opponents and some health professionals argued the proposal left open questions about oversight, scope and cost. Claire Lehi, a psychiatrist who testified against the bill, told the committee she supports licensure of qualified practitioners in principle but said the current proposal could cause patient confusion: “You don't want to go to a medical doctor who has not been through all the credentials they need to go through to become a medical doctor. You want to be sure…you're going to someone who is actually credentialed in their field.” Department of Health representatives told the committee they were neutral on the concept but raised technical and regulatory concerns earlier in the process.

The bill would have renamed the existing Acupuncture Board to a Natural Medicine Board and added naturopathic physicians as board members. Sponsors emphasized the measure did not include prescriptive authority or minor surgery in Arkansas. Representative Ferguson confirmed during questioning that SB117 “does not allow prescriptive authority.” Supporters said licensure could enable insurance reimbursement and attract practitioners now practicing out of state; opponents warned it could create licensing and enforcement challenges and risk delays in diagnosing serious illness.

Committee members debated training, practice scope and fiscal impact. Testimony cited that 23 states plus three U.S. territories currently license naturopathic physicians; witnesses testified there are about eight naturopathic doctors currently practicing in Arkansas under other credentials. Supporters argued long-term cost savings from improved chronic disease management; skeptics said evidence of cost reductions was limited and raised risks of delayed diagnosis if patients substitute naturopathic care for conventional care.

After extended questioning and public testimony both for and against the bill, the committee called the roll. The measure failed when the chair announced, “With 9 votes, it fell short of the 11 needed to pass.”

The vote leaves the licensure question unresolved; sponsors said they will continue pursuing options, including possible interim study or future bill variations that address enforcement, board composition and fiscal concerns.