Legislature(2013 - 2014)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/17/2014 01:30 PM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB193 | |
| HB305 | |
| HB121 | |
| HB328 | |
| HB143 | |
| HB282 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 193 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 305 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 121 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 328 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 143 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 282 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 204 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 231 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 19 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 328(L&C)
"An Act establishing the Board of Massage Therapists;
relating to the licensing of massage therapists; and
providing for an effective date."
2:41:51 PM
AMANDA UNSER, CHAIR, AMERICAN MASSAGE THERAPY LICENSING
COALITION, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), briefly spoke in
support of HB 328. She related that the massage therapists
were aware that licensing fees were associated with state
licensure.
REPRESENTATIVE BENJAMIN NAGEAK, introduced HB 328 and
related that it established a board of massage therapy to
provide regulation for certification, educational
standards, promote a code of ethics, public safety, self-
regulation, accountability, business development, grievance
process and increased access to therapy. He added that the
legislation would allow massage therapist to directly bill
insurance.
VICTORIA DANCE, SELF, JUNEAU, related her extensive
experience in the massage therapy profession. She had
serious concerns and "pragmatic" issues with the bill. She
shared that the coalition had only surveyed 43 massage
therapists out of an estimated 600 in the state, and that
17 respondents only favored licensing if "it was done
right." She thought that the bill was a good start in
bringing state licensure into alignment with other state
licensing programs. She believed that the legislation did
not reflect current competency industry standards, the
licensing fees would be high, and that the bill would not
enable therapists to directly bill insurance. She detailed
that the Entry Level Analysis project established a
competency standard for massage therapists of 625 hours.
The recommendations were established after HB 328 was
introduced. She relayed that 500 hours of education was an
arbitrary standard based on relaxation massage and not
medical or therapeutic massage. She continued that the
licensing fee would be very high, which created a hardship
for entry level therapists. Fifty-three percent of states
had licensing fees set at $100 to $150. She cautioned that
investigations could lead to high licensing fees due to the
existence of "massage parlors." The licensing board in
Arizona had to deal with approximately 12 investigations
each year related to massage parlors and the West Virginia
board recently undertook an investigation that costs $200
thousand that resulted in increased fees. She pointed out
that Washington was the only state massage therapy board
that had a mandate to bill third party insurance. She
worried that the bill was not the adequate vehicle to
authorize third party insurance billing for massage
therapists. She summarized that the legislation did not
adequately address public protection by allowing
educational licensing requirements under 625 hours and that
the fees were too high for entry level and part-time
therapists.
2:52:47 PM
Ms. Unser addressed the concerns raised by Ms. Dance. She
maintained that 500 hours was the national standard and
that the board would be implementing continuing education
standards. The coalition estimated that the licensing fees
would be $225 each year, which was within national
standards. The fees were equivalent to performing four to
eight massages over a two year period and were a tax write
off. She offered that investigations related to massage
parlors were criminal and not board investigations. She
assured the committee that individual insurance companies
set policies regarding accepting massage therapists as
preferred providers and most allowed the practice. Online
courses for CPR and continuing education were included in
the bill to provide rural therapists easier and less costly
access to complete required continuing education.
Vice-Chair Fairclough cited page 3 of the bill under
"Qualification for a License." She related that Ms. Dance
indicated that the 625 hour educational standard was only
recently changed and asked for confirmation that 500 hours
remained the national standard.
Ms. Unser assured Vice-Chair Fairclough that the American
Massage Therapy Association (AMTA), Associated Bodywork and
Massage Professionals (ABMT), and the National Association
of Massage Therapy upheld the 500 hour standard.
Senator Olson wondered what types of complaints were made
against massage therapists.
MARY, SCHLOSSER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BENJAMIN NAGEAK,
replied that issues of sexual inappropriateness related to
massage parlors could possibly happen. She related that she
never had a complaint after receiving massage therapy.
Co-Chair Kelly thought that complaints concerning massage
parlors would be a criminal issue.
Vice-Chair Fairclough noted that Ms. Dance indicated that
only Washington allowed third party billing. She inquired
whether massage therapy had its own medical codes and how
billing would work.
Ms. Unser responded that specific codes for massage therapy
procedures existed. She voiced that insurance companies do
recognize massage therapists as third party billers in
states that have state licensure. Each individual insurance
company had different requirements regarding massage
billing that could include a doctor's referrals, medical
necessity, or limited number of treatments.
Co-Chair Kelly asked what average licensing fees in other
states were.
Ms. Unser responded that the national average was $250 per
year.
Senator Bishop referenced Section 10 on page 10. He
wondered whether the section contained the "grandfathering
provisions."
Ms. Unser replied in the affirmative. She interjected that
according to previous testimony by the Division of
Insurance direct billing would be guided by individual
insurance policies.
3:01:15 PM
AT EASE
3:02:37 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Kelly CLOSED public testimony
Ms. Schlosser referenced the document titled, "States
Regulating Massage Therapy" (copy on file) which contained
a map of the U.S. designating the states that regulated
massage therapy and noted that Alaska was behind the curve.
She maintained that licensing was a matter of
professionalism and public safety. She stated that without
licensure any cases of inappropriate touch had to be
pursued as a civil case.
3:03:55 PM
AT EASE
3:05:13 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Kelly inquired whether the legislation allowed
massage therapist to directly bill insurance companies.
MARTY HESTER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INSURANCE,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
(via teleconference), responded that HB 328 amended Title 8
and the changes did not alter or affect Title 21 of the
insurance code. The department did not anticipate a cause
and effect relationship between Title 21 and HB 328.
Vice-Chair Fairclough inquired whether the bill allowed
massage therapists to directly bill insurance.
Mr. Hester responded that the bill did not mandate what
insurance policies should cover. The bill did not mandate a
particular type of coverage or the extent of the coverage.
Vice-Chair Fairclough understood that the bill did not
mandate massage coverage but wondered whether the bill
prevented coverage.
Mr. Hester specified that the Affordable Care Act (ACA)
mandated preventive and rehabilitative care services. The
state's benefit plan was based on a Premera plan that
included massage therapy. State insurance plans that were
compliant with the ACA were required to cover massage
therapy. However, the ACA did not specify to what extent
the services should be covered.
Co-Chair Kelly inquired whether insurance companies would
cover massage therapy services if the state did not have
licensure.
Mr. Hefter responded that massage coverage was dependent on
the individual policy.
Vice-Chair Fairclough noted for the record the she obtained
the report titled "The Core Entry Level Analysis Project"
from the Entry Level Analysis project by the Coalition of
National Massage Therapy Organizations completed in
December, 2013. She relayed that the project's goals were
to define knowledge and skill components of entry level
education and recommendations, recommend the number of
minimum hours of education… for the safe and competent
practice of massage professionals." She confirmed that the
report did recommend 625 hours of educational training but
was uncertain whether the board had adopted the
recommendation.
Ms. Schlosser replied that report was a "survey" and had
not been adopted yet; as a result the national standard
remained at 500 hours. She added that, once established the
massage board had the ability to add additional educational
hours.
Vice-Chair Fairclough reported that the AMTA standard was
500 hours.
3:14:24 PM
AT EASE
3:17:41 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Meyer returned as Chair.
Senator Dunleavy observed that some massage therapists
wanted to be licensed while others did not. He wondered
whether licensing could be optional and what the sponsor's
thoughts were regarding optional licensing.
Ms. Schlosser responded that the objective of licensing was
to set a standard. She related that the sponsor's and
coalition's intent was to set standards for the profession
in Alaska.
Co-Chair Kelly believed that massage therapy professionals
wanted to set a standard to gain legitimacy as a
"professional health field" and that the legislation
furthered that goal.
Vice-Chair Fairclough discovered that some states required
more than 500 hours of educational training and noted that
Arizona required 700 hours. However, it appeared that the
majority of states required 500 hours.
Vice-Chair Fairclough MOVED to REPORT CSHB 328(L&C) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 328(L&C) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one previously published
fiscal impact note: FN1 (CED).
3:20:09 PM
AT EASE
3:24:01 PM
RECONVENED
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|