House committee tables large health‑workforce package after hours of testimony over malpractice changes

The House Human Services Committee voted 5–4 to table House Bill 593 after more than two hours of testimony and debate that centered on proposed medical‑malpractice changes.

Sponsors said the multi‑section bill is aimed at recruiting and keeping physicians and other health professionals in New Mexico by expanding tax credits, creating a residency loan‑repayment program and limiting prior authorization for certain chronic treatments. Opponents, including injured patients, tribal advocates and trial‑lawyer groups, told the committee the malpractice provisions would reduce victims’ options and shift more control over future care to an insurer‑run fund.

Representative Jennifer Jones, a sponsor and the bill’s main presenter, told the committee the measure is “a multi‑pronged approach to attract and retain health care workforce, which will ensure New Mexicans have access to quality health care when and where they need it.” She described core elements of the health‑committee substitute as increasing rural practitioner tax credits, creating a new physician income tax credit and establishing a medical residency loan‑repayment program.

Key provisions described by sponsors and witnesses included: - Tripling the rural health‑care practitioner tax credit from $8,000 to $24,000 and expanding eligibility to include LPNs, EMTs, paramedics, speech‑language pathologists, occupational therapists and chiropractors (sponsor summary). - A refundable physician income tax credit of $50,000 per year for qualifying full‑time physicians with student loans, claimable for up to five years. - A Medical Residency Loan Repayment Act to pay off qualifying physicians’ student loans over three years in exchange for a five‑year practice commitment in New Mexico; Section 20 includes a $3,000,000 appropriation meant to cover the program’s first year and assumes roughly 45–55 participants in year one (sponsor statement). - New requirements in the Public Assistance Act to direct cost studies of Medicaid provider reimbursement every three years. - Limits on prior authorization for chemotherapy, dialysis, elder care, home health and medications for diabetes and high blood pressure. - Medical‑malpractice changes that would redefine “occurrence” to aggregate claims arising from a single patient incident, reduce certain liability limits and cap punitive damages at no more than 30 times the state median annual household income in New Mexico.

Supporters said the package attacks a severe workforce shortage. Jerry Harrison, executive director of New Mexico Health Resources, described the organization’s recruitment work: “This fiscal year, at the February, we had contacted about had interaction with about 2,500 health professionals… Out of those roughly 2,500 during this fiscal year so far, we've only received 85 resumes,” Harrison said, arguing that the state must become more competitive to attract practitioners.

Business groups and medical organizations also supported the bill. JD Bullington, speaking for the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, said “we can't go another year without taking meaningful actions to keep our health care professionals and to attract new practitioners.” Dr. Angelina Villas Adams, president of the New Mexico Medical Society, said the bill “will not fix all the problems, but it's a giant step to help.”

Opponents concentrated on the malpractice sections. Multiple injured patients and family members described lifetime medical needs and said shifting future care into a fund that approves expenses would strip harmed patients of the option for lump‑sum settlements that families use to secure long‑term care. Robin Zimberoff, who identified herself as injured in a prior malpractice incident, said she “oppose[d] the medical malpractice reforms in HB 593.” Dominique Dupont, whose daughter suffered a catastrophic brain injury at birth, told the committee the bill “would take that option away from future harmed patients, forcing them into a government run insurance system where they must ask permission for every medical expense.”

Sid Lopez, a lobbyist for the New Mexico Trial Attorneys, urged the committee to oppose the malpractice changes and said state administrators had told a public hearing that substantial premium increases were largely tied to a hospital repayment agreement, not solely malpractice payouts.

Committee members debated tradeoffs. Several members — including Representative Nicole Chavez and Representative Martinez — pressed sponsors on data about how many providers have left the state and on the evidence linking malpractice law changes to workforce losses. Harrison and other witnesses said statewide workforce data are incomplete because of a damaged licensing database; Harrison said New Mexico Health Resources had 769 open positions from employers seeking recruitment help and that number had roughly doubled from the prior year.

Representative Kates, citing personal experience with a child injured at birth, said she opposed the bill because it would remove the meaningful control a lump‑sum settlement gives families. Other members described the bill’s tax‑credit and loan‑repayment features as potentially valuable recruitment tools. Several speakers, including sponsors, said elements of the package had been combined because separate bills had not received hearings earlier in the session.

The committee took several procedural steps before the final decision. Members first adopted the committee substitute; then Representative Anaya moved to table the substitute (seconded by Representative Ferrari). The tabling motion passed 5–4, effectively pausing consideration.

Because the substitute was tabled, the bill will not advance from the committee at this time. Sponsors and several supporters said they plan to continue negotiations and urged further data collection on workforce trends and reimbursement rates.

What’s next: The committee vote paused the bill’s progress. Sponsors and stakeholders asked for more robust workforce data, cost studies and continued negotiation between patient advocates, providers, insurers and the Legislature before any future action.