Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/18/2000 05:45 PM Senate RLS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 256-PHYSICIAN NEGOTIATIONS WITH HEALTH INSURER
CHAIRMAN KELLY announced that two proposed amendments are before
the committee; one sponsored by Senator Pete Kelly and the other by
the Department of Law (DOL).
SENATOR MILLER moved to adopt the amendment proposed by Senator
Pete Kelly. That amendment reads as follows.
A M E N D M E N T
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR PETE KELLY
TO: CSSB 256(FIN)
Page 4, lines 10 - 11:
Delete ", or a particular physician type or specialty"
Page 4, line 15:
Delete "and"
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(7) the attorney general may limit the percentage
of practicing physicians represented by an authorized third
party; however, the limitation may not be less than 30 percent
of the market of practicing physicians in the geographic
service area or proposed geographic service area; when
determining whether to impose a limitation described under
this paragraph, the attorney general shall consider the
provisions described under (h), (i), and (j) of this section;
this paragraph does not apply if the market of practicing
physicians in the geographic service area or proposed
geographic service area consists of 40 or fewer individuals;
and"
Renumber the following paragraph accordingly.
SENATOR ELLIS objected to the adoption of the amendment.
CHAIRMAN KELLY noted that unless the DOL amendment to Senator
Kelly's amendment is offered at this time, the vote will only
pertain to Senator Kelly's amendment.
SENATOR ELLIS moved to adopt the DOL amendment which reads as
follows.
A M E N D M E N T - VERSION 2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY DEPARTMENT OF LAW
TO: CSSB 256(FIN)
[Page 4, lines 10-11:
Delete ", or a particular physician type or specialty"]
Page 4, line 15:
Delete "and"
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(7) the attorney general may limit the percentage of
practicing physicians or a particular physician type or
specialty represented by an authorized third party;
[however, the limitation may not be less than 30 percent
of the market of practicing physicians in the geographic
service area or proposed geographic service area;] when
determining whether to impose a limitation described
under this paragraph, the attorney general shall consider
the provisions described under (h), [(i), and (j)] of
this section; [this paragraph does not apply if the
market of practicing physicians in the geographic service
area or proposed geographic service area consists of 40
or fewer individuals;] and"
Renumber the following paragraph accordingly."
SENATOR MILLER objected to the adoption of DOL's amendment.
SENATOR PEARCE asked for an explanation of the amendment.
SENATOR PETE KELLY, sponsor of SB 256, explained that the problem
with DOL's amendment is that it essentially guts the bill. It
turns policy decisions over to DOL. The wording of the amendment
will allow DOL to declare that no one is eligible to participate in
the negotiations. DOL's amendment gives DOL way too much authority
over the negotiations.
MS. JULIA COSTER, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law,
responded that the first part of DOL's amendment actually returns
the bill to what it was originally. On page 4, subsection (6), the
bill originally allowed the number of physicians to be limited to
30 percent, both in the general and specialty markets. The second
part of the DOL amendment allows the physician group to be limited
not only on the entire market but also with the specialty market
which was in subsection (6) also. She thought that Senator Pete
Kelly was referring to the deletion of the limit in DOL's
amendment. She did not agree that it guts the bill; it allows the
Attorney General to have the percentage of physicians be less than
30 percent if it meets the criteria under subsection (h), which
means the Attorney General would determine whether or not the anti-
competitive effects of a larger group of people outweigh the
benefit. It would allow the Attorney General to engage in a
balancing test. That same provision is required under the Texas
legislation.
Number 357
SENATOR PETE KELLY asked that Mike Ford, the legal drafter of SB
256, address DOL's amendment. He noted that Mr. Ford provided
committee members with his analysis of DOL's objections to the
bill.
MR. MIKE FORD, Division of Legal Services, Legislative Affairs
Agency, stated that after reading DOL's amendment, he cannot see
how one can maintain that it does not allow the Attorney General to
go to a zero percentage. It does not set up a mechanism that would
limit the Attorney General's authority. It removes the bottom cap
that prevents the limitation from being less than 30 percent. He
agreed that it leaves in the consideration of subsection (h) but
that does not preclude the Attorney General from determining that
a percentage may be one or two percent.
SENATOR MILLER continued to object to DOL's amendment. The motion
to adopt DOL's amendment failed with Senators Leman, Miller and
Pearce voting "nay," and Senators Ellis and Kelly voting "yea."
SENATOR LEMAN moved to adopt Senator Pete Kelly's amendment. There
being no objection, the motion carried.
SENATOR LEMAN moved to calendar all Senate versions of SB 276 at
the Chairman's discretion. SENATOR ELLIS objected.
The motion to calendar all versions of SB 276 carried with Senators
Miller, Pearce, Leman and Kelly voting "yea," and Senator Ellis
voting "nay."
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|