By Mike Shields
KHI News Service
TOPEKA, April 2
A controversial bill exempting professional services by health care providers from the Kansas Consumer Protection Act is still in play and expected to be voted on early this week on the House and Senate floors.
House Bill 2530
was the subject of a Friday morning conference committee after Rep. Mike O”Neal, R-Hutchinson, a leading backer of the measure, let it be known it was a top House priority. O”Neal is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
The bill easily cleared his committee.
But it was
less favorably received in the Senate Judiciary Committee
, where protests from the attorney general, the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association, the AARP and other consumer groups seemed to hold more sway.
“This bill would prevent my office from investigating the most deceptive and unconscionable acts committed by anyone in the health care industry,” Morrison said, when he testified at the bill”s Senate hearing.
He said the measure was too broad and exempted everyone in health care from “chiropractors to new-age nutritionists.”
And the bill had the support of virtually every health care organization in the state ranging from the Kansas Medical Society to veterinarians, who said it would open the door to more litigation and ultimately higher health care costs.
O”Neal and other supporters said the law needed to be changed because of a Feb. 9 Kansas Supreme Court decision in the case of
Williamson v. Amrani
, in which the court found that a Wichita doctor could be held liable for deceptive acts and practices under the consumer protection law. The high court sent the case back to district court.
Supporters said until the decision it was generally assumed that malpractice claims were the sole recourse for those wronged by health care providers. But opponents said the health care industry was working to change a long-standing law to solve a problem that hadn”t been shown to exist.
“You just kind of have to wonder what the problem was that made this bill come into play,” said Corrie Edwards, executive director of the Kansas Health Consumer Coalition. “We have gone along for years now with the act the way it is. I don”t understand all of the hubbub around this right now.”
The bill would not exempt advertising, billing or other business practices by health providers, but would protect them from consumer claims stemming from treatment and non-business services. Supporters of the bill said that qualifier left in place plenty of protection for consumers when coupled with malpractice law and regulations from the Kansas Board of Healing Arts and other oversight boards.
Agreement was reached in the conference committee after the bill was amended to include another qualifier that would allow the attorney general or district attorneys to pursue consumer protection actions, but still exclude direct action by consumers or their lawyers. The language of HB 2530 and that amendment were put into Senate Bill 55.
The amendment failed to satisfy the bill”s opponents.
“While the attorney general retains the authority to deal with consumer health care complaints, we believe that it’s unnecessary to weaken the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.
Attorney General Morrison remains concerned about creating exemptions to the KCPA,” said spokesperson Ashley Anstaett.
“What county attorneys tell us is that they really don”t have the resources to pursue these $1,000 and $2,000 cases. It”s really quite a blow,” said Callie Denton Hartle, public affairs director for the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association.
“It didn”t really satisfy any of our concerns,” Edwards said. “Personally, I think the amendment was just kind of a smokescreen to try to placate this new coalition that is formed. I think the benefit to consumers is an illusion if they think they”re going to be able to file a claim, even as amended.”
Edwards” group is one of several that have banded together to fight the bill. Others in the coalition announced last week include AARP Kansas, Kansas Advocates for Better Care, the trial lawyers association, the Statewide Independent Living Council of Kansas and the Kansas Association of Centers for Independent Living.
O”Neal, who earns a living defending against malpractice claims, and others have cast the debate as one between doctors and trial lawyers of little real consequence for consumers.
“This legislation does not protect deceptive and dishonest health care providers,” said Jerry Slaughter of the Kansas Medical Society. “It does discourage enterprising plaintiffs” lawyers from filing costly and meritless consumer protection act claims, and using an otherwise good law in ways that were not intended.”
It wasn”t immediately clear what Gov. Kathleen Sebelius might do if the bill reaches her desk. She once worked for the trial lawyers association early in her career.
News of the conference committee agreement hadn”t reached her later Friday morning. When asked about it, she said:
“I haven’t really seen the details of the bill. My understanding is the bill is in a committee someplace so it’s not at this point traveling through the process. I know that there have been local district attornies and the attorney general on one side and others on the other side. I think it’s being discussed right now, but my understanding is that it’s not going anywhere.”
-Mike Shields is a staff writer for KHI News Service, which specializes in coverage of health issues facing Kansans. He can be reached at
mshields@khi.org
or at 785-233-5443, ext. 123.