Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare Access Certificate Of Need topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to increase patient choice; members flag rural certificate-of-need risks
Summary
Representative Sullivan reintroduced an interim study proposal to expand patient choice and address structural barriers that leave specialty provider buildings unused; members and DHS urged careful drafting to protect single-provider rural counties and clarify rulemaking authority.
Representative Sullivan introduced an interim study proposal he said he previously ran during the last session and refiled to give committee members an opportunity to "ask questions or dig a little bit deeper." He said the bill's primary purpose is to allow patient choice where patients currently have little provider selection, and that he has talked with DHS and provider groups and is willing to compromise.
Sullivan told the committee there are structural problems in how regions are designed, how needs are determined, and how some businesses are unable to sell or operate facilities built for this industry. "We have businesses that would like to start but can't ... they're stuck holding the building," he said, describing cases of facilities that cannot sell or operate under current rules.
Representative Gray warned that in small rural counties the bill could effectively eliminate certificate-of-need protections and allow a second provider to enter markets that have only one viable provider. "If you come in and do a second provider and there's barely enough need for one, you're gonna end up with two facilities that can't make it," Gray said, urging targeted protections for counties with only one provider.
Mark White of the Department of Human Services told the committee DHS is open to discussions and would welcome improvements to an unclear statute that creates administrative challenges. Committee members asked for more detail about how rulemaking would be handled and whether the definition of "underserved" should be placed in statute or left to rules; Sullivan said he would work with DHS on clarifying language and possibly narrow exceptions.
No vote was taken; the sponsor framed the item as an interim study and said he would pursue stakeholder conversations and possible rule or statutory clarifications before filing final legislation.
Next steps: sponsor and DHS to continue discussions to address rural protections, certificate-of-need concerns, and rulemaking details prior to session.
