New Healthcare Laws
SB 482, sponsored by Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens), seeks to prevent opioid overdose deaths, which, according to state officials, have increased by 200% since 2000. California is the first of 49 states that currently have prescription drug monitoring programs.
AB 72 | Healthcare Coverage: Out-of-network Coverage AB 72 requires a healthcare service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended or renewed on or after July 1, 2017, to provide that if an enrollee or insured receives covered services from a contracting health facility and covered services by a non-contracting health provider, the enrollee would be required to pay the non-contracting provider only the “in-network cost-sharing amount.” The bill would prohibit the insured from owing the non-contracting health provider anything more than the in-network cost-sharing amount. The bill makes an exception from this prohibition if the insured provides written consent that satisfies specified criteria. The bill would require a non-contracting health provider who collects more than the in-network cost-sharing amount from the insured to refund any overpayment to the enrollee or insured, as specified, and would provide that interest on any payment not refunded to the enrollee or insured accrue at 15% per annum, as specified. Shortly after Gov. Jerry Brown signed the law in October 2016, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court requesting the court to block the new law. According to court documents, the complaint by AAPS names the governor and the head of the state Department of Managed Health Care as defendants and states that the law violates the U.S. and California constitutions in at least three ways. PNN reported the Act violates the Due Process Clauses of the U.S. and California constitutions by delegating rate-setting authority to private insurance companies with respect to physicians who are not under any contract with the insurance companies. It also says the Act is unconstitutional under the Due Process Clauses by requiring arbitration for the out-ofnetwork physicians for their reimbursements, thereby denying them their due process rights in court for their claims. Furthermore, PNN reported, the Act violates the Takings Clause of both the U.S. and California constitutions because the Act empowers private insurance companies to deprive outof-network physicians of the market value of their services, and arbitrarily denies them just compensation for their labor. The Act also reportedly violates the Equal Protection Clause of both the U.S. and California constitutions by having a disparate impact on minority patients for whom the availability of medical care will sharply decline as out-of-network physicians are coerced by the Act to withdraw services from predominantly minority communities. Others see the Act as protecting patients and their well-being. 10 | THE BULLETIN | JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2017
AB 1671 | Confidential Communications: Disclosure Distributing secret recordings involving healthcare conversations will become a crime in California in 2017. Introduced by Los Angeles Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez in the wake of an undercover Planned Parenthood investigation, AB 1671 makes it a crime for a person who unlawfully eavesdrops upon or records a confidential communication with a healthcare provider to intentionally disclose or distribute the contents of the confidential communication in any manner, in any forum, including on Internet websites and social media, or for any purpose without the consent of all parties to the confidential communication unless specified conditions are met.
AB 2828 | Personal Information: Privacy: Breach Data breach notification will now be required for instances when encrypted personal information of California residents has been breached and certain conditions are met, according to this newly amended law. Previously, California’s data breach notification law required organizations to notify individuals only if unencrypted personal information was reasonably believed to have been acquired by an unauthorized third party.
AB 2745 | Healing Arts: Licensing and Certification AB 2745 specifies that a physician or surgeon licensee who is otherwise eligible for a license but is unable to practice some aspects of medicine safely due to a disability is authorized to receive the limited license if specified described conditions are met, including payment of the appropriate fee. The bill clarifies the Medical Board of California’s authority to revoke, suspend or deny a license for licensees and applicants who are guilty of unprofessional conduct, expands the Board’s authority to request medical records of deceased patients, and authorizes specified disciplinary actions for licensed midwives, research psychoanalysts and certified polysomnographic technologists.
SB 1478 | Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development. Healing Arts. Existing law requires the Medical Board of California to keep a copy of a complaint it receives regarding the poor quality of care rendered by a licensee for 10 years from the date the board receives the complaint, as provided. This bill deletes that requirement. Existing law requires a CURES fee of $6 to be assessed annually, at the time of license renewal, on specified licensees to pay the reasonable costs associated with operating and maintaining CURES for the purpose of