Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Interstate Compact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers hear proposal to join dentist and dental‑hygienist interstate compact to ease licensure portability
Summary
Representative Fairbairn introduced House Bill 49 35 to authorize Michigan's participation in the dentist and dental hygienist compact, which would give licensed practitioners "compact privileges" to practice across participating states and create an interstate licensure-data system.
Representative Fairbairn told the House Health Policy Committee that House Bill 49 35 would authorize Michigan to join the dentist and dental hygienist compact, a multistate licensure framework developed with the Council of State Governments, the American Dental Association, the American Dental Hygienist Association and the Department of Defense.
"By joining the compact, Michigan would enhance workforce development and strengthen labor markets, expand consumer access to highly qualified practitioners, and enhance public safety through a shared interstate data system of licensure and disciplinary information," Fairbairn said.
Sandy Sutton, president of the Michigan Dental Hygiene Association, spoke in support. She said the compact has been enacted in 12 states, including neighboring Ohio and Wisconsin, and that legislation has been introduced in additional states. Sutton said the compact would permit licensure portability, reduce duplicative licensing burdens and could help address dental workforce shortages and access-to-care issues.
"The DDH compact is a solution to workforce shortages and access to care issues while maintaining high state standards," Sutton told the committee.
Committee members asked how the compact might affect underserved areas. Representative Preston asked about the effect on dental supply in the Upper Peninsula; witnesses said allowing practitioners with compact privileges to practice across state lines could help fill local shortages. Representative Carter asked whether the compact might increase costs for low-income or rural communities; the testimony argued the compact should increase competition and could lower prices, but no empirical cost estimates were provided. Committee members also asked whether joining would require additional state resources; the sponsor and witnesses did not provide a fiscal estimate and offered to research implementation costs.
No committee vote on HB 49 35 was taken at the hearing.
