Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Physician Assistant Licensure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves physician assistant rules but excludes named exam after DEI dispute
Summary
The House Health and Welfare Committee approved the pending rule chapter for physician assistants (docket 2433022401) but voted to exclude the section that named the national certifying exam after members raised concerns about the certifying body’s public statements on diversity, equity and inclusion.
The House Health and Welfare Committee on a voice and recorded vote approved the physician assistant pending rule chapter (docket 2433022401) while removing section 100.01 that would have named the nation’s certifying exam. The committee’s action followed an extended colloquy about the National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants and whether the exam it administers should be named in state rules.
Why it matters: The change leaves the rule chapter in place while omitting the explicit naming of the national exam. Committee staff and the presenter said removing the exam name does not prevent the division from continuing to use the existing national exam operationally, but it creates a gap between statute and the rule text that the division said it prefers to avoid.
The rule presenter, Nikki Chopsky, bureau chief for the Health Professions Bureau at the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses, told the committee the exam used to test physician assistants is the “physician assistant national certifying examination. We call it PANCE.” She also told members that statute requires an exam be listed in rule, and that omitting the name would not stop the division from continuing to test and license physician assistants in the usual way.
Representative John Redmond pressed concerns about the certifying body’s stated approach to diversity, equity and inclusion. “The NCCPA, DEI are more than just ideas. They’re part of our guiding principles,” he said during debate, and argued that the state should not endorse that posture in rule text. Representative McCann offered a substitute motion to approve the docket without exceptions, saying, “If this is the only certification, the only test, I don't see any reason that we then should pull it out,” and urged the committee to keep the exam named in rule to avoid creating an enforcement gap.
The substitute motion to approve the docket with the exam named was put to a recorded roll call and failed on the record. Members then returned to the original motion to approve the docket with the exception (removing the named exam). That motion passed.
Division staff told members that the certifying exam is a national instrument and that there is no alternative certifying body or examination available for physician assistants in the United States; creating a state-specific exam, they said, would be complex and costly. Chopsky estimated such a project would cost “hundreds of thousands of dollars” and require external psychometric and security resources.
What happens next: With the committee’s action, the pending rule chapter will be approved as amended (without the named exam). Staff said the practical effect on licensing is limited—applicants will still be tested using the national exam that the profession currently uses—but the committee’s action removes the exam’s name from the rule text.
The committee also discussed the PA advisory committee’s cash balance during this session; Chopsky reported that the relevant advisory committee’s FY24 cash balance was $215,356.11 and that the committee had recommended a fee reduction in related board rulemaking elsewhere.
The committee did not adopt any statutory changes during the meeting; its action only addressed the pending rule docket before it.
