Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Licensure Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Health and Welfare committee approves licensure rule docket; debate over genetic counselors’ ethics left for later
Summary
The House Health and Welfare Committee approved docket 242401, a package of occupational and professional licensure rule changes, while agreeing to review separately whether to remove an incorporated sentence from the National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Code of Ethics.
The House Health and Welfare Committee approved docket 242401, a set of rule changes for the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses, after extended discussion about whether to remove an incorporated portion of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Code of Ethics.
John Price, bureau chief for the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses, told the committee the language at issue had been in the chapter and was moved during rule reorganization: “This has always been in this chapter. It merely got moved,” Price said. The contested language involved an incorporation by reference of the NSGC Code of Ethics that some members said would require counselors to provide guidance based on race or religion; Price and others said the specific sentence of concern could be removed at the final-rule stage.
Representative Raizer first moved to approve the docket striking the portion identified as subsection 200.1 (unprofessional and unethical conduct). After procedural questions and advice from Brad Hunt of the state Office of the Administrative Rules Coordinator about how incorporation-by-reference and final-rule procedures work, Representative Furman offered a substitute motion to approve the full docket as written and to work with the department on the incorporation issue later. Representative Furman’s substitute motion became the primary motion after the original motion was withdrawn by unanimous consent.
Brad Hunt told the committee that the previously finalized, incorporated document (a 2017 version referenced during debate) would require a separate action to reject parts of the final rule: rejecting or striking portions of an incorporated final rule is possible, but it is a separate procedural step. The committee chair said the committee would bring the final, incorporated rule back for review so the panel could address the specific sentence in the NSGC ethics code.
By voice vote the committee approved the docket as written. Committee members said the incorporation question will be taken up as a final-rule matter at a later meeting; no final change to the NSGC language was adopted at this session.
