Committee reconsiders and votes 'not to pass as amended' on health‑care material‑change bill after confidentiality, fees debate
Loading...
Summary
The committee reconsidered LD 22‑01, which would change reporting and review of material‑change transactions for health‑care entities, increase initial filing‑fee ranges, and add confidentiality for tax IDs. After debate, the committee voted to 'not pass as amended.'
The Health Coverage, Insurance and Financial Services Committee reconsidered LD 22‑01, a bill that would alter the review and reporting process for material‑change transactions involving health‑care entities, and voted to recommend it not pass as amended.
Committee staff told members the purple draft exempts dental‑only practices from the review, widens the department rule‑setting range for initial filing fees from $1,000–$5,000 to $2,000–$10,000, narrows a small‑provider exemption to organizations with six or fewer providers, and provides confidentiality for business identification numbers and tax identification numbers in certain circumstances.
The measure prompted questions from multiple members about what ‘business structure’ and ‘business type’ reporting would require, whether the Maine Health Data Organization (MHDO) already standardizes the fields, and exactly how tax identification numbers would be handled. Staff responded that MHDO has existing data standards and that tax identification numbers would be confidential and posted only if already publicly available.
Representative Sally Clucci moved to reconsider the bill; the motion was seconded and carried by unanimous voice/hand vote. On subsequent floor action, Representative Bob Foley moved that the committee recommend the bill 'not to pass as amended.' The motion was seconded by Representative Michelle Boyer. The clerk called the roll; the chair reported 10 votes in the affirmative and 0 in the negative, and the motion carried.
The committee record shows the bill will undergo any required fiscal review and that staff will forward a memo to the Judiciary Committee about confidentiality provisions that require a judicial review. The chair said the committee will continue remaining language reviews electronically as needed.
What’s next: Staff will complete the fiscal review and route the confidentiality questions to the Judiciary Committee for review; the committee’s recommendation that LD 22‑01 not pass as amended will be forwarded with the committee report.
