- Joined
- Apr 22, 2000
- Messages
- 145
- Reaction score
- 144
In Michigan - Senate Bill 1019 (SB 1019) cleared the state senate. Here is the letter we got from the MSA:
This week, the Michigan State Senate ignored the voices of patients and physicians across the state who urged them not to remove physician involvement in anesthesia care. The Senate has passed Senate Bill 1019 which increases the scope of practice for nurse anesthetists and allows them to practice independently. It passed 22-15 and the breakdown of the vote is below.
You may recall that the last week of session prior to the summer break, the Senate introduced SB 1019, which is nearly identical to Senate Bill 320. The Michigan Society of Anesthesiologists and your lobbyist, GCSI, had been working for a year with members of the Senate Health Policy Committee on SB 320, having offered amendments that went unanswered, and demonstrating again and again to members of that committee how dangerous this legislation really is. As a result, committee members rightly refused to take action on SB 320.
In order to pass SB 1019, the nurse anesthetists and Michigan Health and Hospital Association needed to “committee shop” to put the legislation before a brand new Senate Committee. The Michigan Competitiveness Committee held a hearing on SB 1019, just one day after the bill was introduced, and voted it out after only 10 minutes of testimony.
Some supporters of SB 1019 may say that a physician will still be involved in anesthesia under the bill or “this doesn’t change much”. As it currently stands, SB 1019 states the nurse anesthetist is the “sole and independent anesthesia provider if he or she is part of a patient-centered care team.” The definition of a “patient-centered care team” under the bill states that it “MAY include, but is NOT REQUIRED to include, physicians”. Plain and simple, physician involvement is removed under the bill.
Michigan is currently one of 46 states that requires some level of physician involvement when it comes to the administration of anesthesia. With SB 1019 in its present form, Michigan will only be the fifth state which allows a nurse anesthetist to practice outside of the relationship of a physician. Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Utah are the only four states currently that allow this. Supporters will argue that this bill puts Michigan in line with “40 other states” however, which is simply untrue.
Many Senators were denied the opportunity to offer amendments to the bill while it was being considered by the full Senate before the vote this week.
We thank all of the MSA members that had reached out to their lawmakers prior to the vote. I encourage you again to do this time thanking your lawmaker if they stood up for patient safety by opposing the bill or letting your Senator know your disappointment if they supported SB 1019. We will be sending out an action alert soon for MSA members to get in touch with their State Representative on this issue and we will be engaging in the rest of our PR plan. We have a long way to go on this still but wanted you to have the most up to date information on this issue. We encourage our members to stay engaged as we fight this to the end.
Senate Yes Votes on SB 1019
Ananich
Booher
Casperson
Emmons
Green
Hertel
Hildenbrand
Hood
Johnson
Knezek
Knollenberg
Kowall
MacGregor
Marleau
Meekhof
Nofs
Pavlov
Proos
Schmidt
Shirkey
Stamas
Warren
Senate No Votes on SB 1019
Bieda
Brandenburg
Colbeck
Gregory
Hansen
Hopgood
Horn
Hune
Jones
O’Brien
Robertson
Rocca
Schuitmaker
Young
Zorn
This week, the Michigan State Senate ignored the voices of patients and physicians across the state who urged them not to remove physician involvement in anesthesia care. The Senate has passed Senate Bill 1019 which increases the scope of practice for nurse anesthetists and allows them to practice independently. It passed 22-15 and the breakdown of the vote is below.
You may recall that the last week of session prior to the summer break, the Senate introduced SB 1019, which is nearly identical to Senate Bill 320. The Michigan Society of Anesthesiologists and your lobbyist, GCSI, had been working for a year with members of the Senate Health Policy Committee on SB 320, having offered amendments that went unanswered, and demonstrating again and again to members of that committee how dangerous this legislation really is. As a result, committee members rightly refused to take action on SB 320.
In order to pass SB 1019, the nurse anesthetists and Michigan Health and Hospital Association needed to “committee shop” to put the legislation before a brand new Senate Committee. The Michigan Competitiveness Committee held a hearing on SB 1019, just one day after the bill was introduced, and voted it out after only 10 minutes of testimony.
Some supporters of SB 1019 may say that a physician will still be involved in anesthesia under the bill or “this doesn’t change much”. As it currently stands, SB 1019 states the nurse anesthetist is the “sole and independent anesthesia provider if he or she is part of a patient-centered care team.” The definition of a “patient-centered care team” under the bill states that it “MAY include, but is NOT REQUIRED to include, physicians”. Plain and simple, physician involvement is removed under the bill.
Michigan is currently one of 46 states that requires some level of physician involvement when it comes to the administration of anesthesia. With SB 1019 in its present form, Michigan will only be the fifth state which allows a nurse anesthetist to practice outside of the relationship of a physician. Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Utah are the only four states currently that allow this. Supporters will argue that this bill puts Michigan in line with “40 other states” however, which is simply untrue.
Many Senators were denied the opportunity to offer amendments to the bill while it was being considered by the full Senate before the vote this week.
We thank all of the MSA members that had reached out to their lawmakers prior to the vote. I encourage you again to do this time thanking your lawmaker if they stood up for patient safety by opposing the bill or letting your Senator know your disappointment if they supported SB 1019. We will be sending out an action alert soon for MSA members to get in touch with their State Representative on this issue and we will be engaging in the rest of our PR plan. We have a long way to go on this still but wanted you to have the most up to date information on this issue. We encourage our members to stay engaged as we fight this to the end.
Senate Yes Votes on SB 1019
Ananich
Booher
Casperson
Emmons
Green
Hertel
Hildenbrand
Hood
Johnson
Knezek
Knollenberg
Kowall
MacGregor
Marleau
Meekhof
Nofs
Pavlov
Proos
Schmidt
Shirkey
Stamas
Warren
Senate No Votes on SB 1019
Bieda
Brandenburg
Colbeck
Gregory
Hansen
Hopgood
Horn
Hune
Jones
O’Brien
Robertson
Rocca
Schuitmaker
Young
Zorn