March 12, 2001

For more information contact:

Stanley S. Jones, Jr.

404-817-6133

          Greetings from under the Gold Dome!  Today was the 35th Legislative Day – only five more days left in the 2001 Session.  Bills are falling to the side or attaching themselves to other moving pieces of legislation.  Details of some of the day’s events follow: 

Floor Activity 

          The House had a relatively short calendar.  One of the bills it took up was SB 51, by House Judiciary Committee Substitute, which it passed with a vote of 148 to 2.  SB 51 amends Title 31 and adds a new Section at O.C.G.A. §31-11-53.2.:

“(a) As used in this Code section, the term 'lay rescuer' means a person trained to provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation and to use an automatic external defibrillator, as defined in Code Section 31-11-53.1, and who is participating in a physician or medically authorized automated external defibrillator program.
(b) The following guidelines shall be applicable to the use of automated external defibrillators by lay rescuers:
(1) Any person or entity who acquires an automated external defibrillator shall ensure that:
(A) Expected users of the automated external defibrillator receive American Heart Association or American Red Cross training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator use or complete an equivalent nationally recognized course;
(B) The defibrillator is maintained and tested according to the manufacturer's operational guidelines;
(C) There is involvement of a licensed physician or other person authorized by the composite board in the site's automated external defibrillator program to ensure compliance with requirements for training, notification, and maintenance;
(D) Any person who renders emergency care or treatment on a person in cardiac arrest by using an automated external defibrillator activates the emergency medical services system as soon as possible and reports any clinical use of the automated external defibrillator to the licensed physician or other person authorized by the composite board who is supervising the program; and
(2) Any person or entity who acquires an automated external defibrillator shall notify an agent of the emergency communications or vehicle dispatch center of the existence, location, and type of automated external defibrillator.”

          Further, the bill adds a new Section at O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.3 which grants an immunity from civil liability for any act or omission to act related to the provision of emergency care or treatment by the use of or provision of an automated external defibrillator, except that such immunity shall not apply to an act of willful or wanton misconduct and shall not apply to a person acting within the scope of a licensed profession if such person acts with gross negligence. 

          In the Senate, it passed out HB 355, the Registered Nurse First Assistant Consumer Act bill, by a vote of 49 to 1.  The bill provides in the Insurance Code at O.C.G.A. § 33-24-59.9 that insurance companies will have to “directly reimburse any registered nurse first assistant who has rendered such services at the request of a physician and within the scope of a registered nurse first assistant's professional license.  This Code section shall not apply to a registered nurse first assistant who is employed by the requesting physician or renders such services in the capacity as an employee of the hospital where services are rendered.”  The Senate version of this bill, SB 82, resides in the House Health and Ecology Committee. 

Committee Activity 

          Numerous Committee meetings were held and more are expected tomorrow as time is running short. 

House Judiciary Committee 

          In the House Judiciary Committee, there were a number of bills debated, amended, and passed; some of those taken up are discussed below: 

The Committee first heard SB 205, the Governor’s bill on privacy issues and when public records may be disclosed.  In presenting the bill to the Committee, Rep. Charlie Smith explained that the bill had been amended again and was in a Substitute form.  At the time of this Report, the new Substitute was still not available; one is expected on Tuesday.   Specifically, the bill amends O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72: 

“(11.1)(A) An individual's social security number, mother's birth name, credit card information, debit card information, bank account information, financial data or information, and insurance or medical information in all public records, and if technically feasible at reasonable cost, day and month of birth, which shall be redacted prior to disclosure of any record requested pursuant to this article; provided, however, that such information shall not be redacted from such records if the person or entity requesting such records requests such information in a writing signed under oath by such person or a person legally authorized to represent such entity which states that such person or entity:
(i) Is the individual in respect of whom such information is maintained or has the written consent of such individual or such individual's representative, a true and correct copy of which shall be attached;
(ii) Is a prosecutor or publicly employed law enforcement officer seeking such records in an official capacity;
(iii) Is gathering information as a representative of a news media organization for use in connection with news gathering and reporting;
(iv) Is a public employee of this state, its political subdivisions, or the United States, obtaining such information for legislative or administrative purposes, in which case, subject to applicable laws of the United States, further access to such information shall continue to be subject to the provisions of this paragraph; or
(v) Has been authorized by the order of a court of competent jurisdiction upon good cause shown to have access to any or all of such information upon such conditions as may be set forth in such order.
(B) Obtaining information protected by the provisions of this paragraph fraudulently, under false pretenses, or by means of false swearing shall be punishable as a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.  Commercial use or dissemination of information obtained pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph other than for the purposes provided for in this paragraph shall be punishable as a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.
(C) In the event that the custodian of public records protected by this paragraph has good faith reason to believe that a pending request for such records has been made fraudulently, under false pretenses, or by means of false swearing, such custodian may apply to the superior court of the county in which such records are maintained for an order limiting or prohibiting access to such records.
(D) This paragraph shall be supplementary to, and shall not supplant, overrule, replace, or otherwise modify or supersede any provision of statute or law restricting or prohibiting access to the information identified in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, and shall constitute only a regulation of the methods of such access where not otherwise restricted or prohibited.  Compliance with the terms of this paragraph shall not be a defense to any action, including without limitation an action for invasion of privacy, other than an action brought alleging a violation of this statute.” 

          In the version before the Committee, it added a new (vi) concerning when such information could be released for genealogical purposes. 

A number of individuals testified in opposition to the bill including Bob Cribbs with the Georgia Association of Educators and Steve Nanzo with Nexis/Lexis.  Mr. Cribbs argued that HB 65, which passed out of the Senate earlier in the day by a vote of 51 to zero, protected information from being released to the press.  This bill basically wipes away that protection.  He also argued that it was unclear how the term “news media organization” was defined.  In response to the educators, Mr. Cribbs explained that the Governor’s staff had argued that teachers could bring a legal action if information was wrongly disclosed.  Some of the real ‘rub’ apparently is the passage of HB 1187 which was the Governor’s Education Reform Act of 2000.  Mr. Nanzo explained that his company obtains information which it discloses using social security numbers as unique identifiers so as to help lawyers and police find witnesses or fugitives.  Also, his company helps with child support recovery efforts using a person’s social security number – thus, he believes that this bill could have a significant impact on his business.  

          Rep. Smith argued that social security numbers were already supposed to be held and not disclosed; thus, he did not agree with Mr. Nanzo’s arguments.  After hearing both sides, the Committee decided to hold the bill and it will probably be on the Committee’s agenda for its Thursday meeting. 

          The Judiciary Committee also passed out SB 30 regarding the furnishing of health records.  It amended the bill which allows that a charge of up to $20.00 may be collected for search, retrieval, and other direct administrative costs related to compliance with the request.  It raised the fee for certifying the medical records from $5.00 to $7.50.  The actual cost of postage incurred in mailing the requested records may be charged.  Further, in addition, copying charges for the record which is in paper form shall not exceed $.75 per page for the first 20 pages of the patient’s records which are copied; $.65 per page for pages 21 through 100; and $.50 per page for those in excess of 100 pages.  This new language provided will be found at O.C.G.A. § 31-33-3. 

          The Committee also passed out SB 25 by Sen. Eric Johnson concerning the authorization of delivery of notices, previously required to be delivered by registered or certified mail, to be provided by overnight or commercial delivery service.  This amends the Code at O.C.G.A. § 4-11-9.4(a). 

          The Committee was also to take up SB 50 by Sens. Johnson and Tanksley concerning the authorization made to clerks of superior courts to maintain records in a digital format.  

House Health and Ecology Committee 

The Subcommittee on Health Professions for the House Health and Ecology Committee held a hearing of HB 329 concerning the expansion of the scope of practice for psychologists.  The bill proposes to expand the practice of psychology so that it “shall include the administering, ordering, and prescribing of drugs by a psychologist certified to prescribe for the diagnosis, care, and treatment of mental or nervous disorders or illnesses.”  The psychologist would have to be certified to prescribe as long as he or she meets the training and experience criteria outlined in O.C.G.A. § 43-39-5.1 and is certified by the Board to administer, order and prescribe drugs under that same Code Section. 

Another Subcommittee addressed SB 132 concerning the proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of Title 31 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to emergency medical services, in order to provide for the transfer of certification and re-certification responsibilities for paramedics and cardiac technicians to the Department of Human Resources from the Composite State Board of Medical Examiners. 

Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee 

          The privacy bill which would address requirements by the federal law known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), HB 455, was to be heard by the Committee.  However, the bill was pulled from the Committee’s agenda and is expected to be heard later in the week. The bill amends Title 33 and establishes “appropriate consumer privacy standards for insurance providers to be administered by this State's insurance regulatory authorities; ensures, pursuant to Section 6805(c) of GLBA, that Georgia shall be eligible to override, pursuant to Section 47(g)(2)(B)(iii) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the insurance customer protections prescribed by a federal banking agency under Section 45(a) of such act; requires, pursuant to Sections 6802 and 6803 of GLBA, that insurers maintain a privacy policy that is clearly communicated to customers and, under certain circumstances, to consumers; and that, subject to appropriate exceptions, no nonpublic personal financial information be disclosed to nonaffiliated third parties unless a consumer has been given a chance to opt out of having his or her information disclosed; provides for the enforcement of this chapter by the Commissioner of Insurance; and authorizes the Commissioner to promulgate regulations as determined to be necessary to effectuate the purposes of the new provisions. 

Senate Appropriations Committee 

          In a late afternoon meeting, the Senate Appropriations Committee met to discuss and finalize its recommendations for the FY 2002 Budget.  It is expected to be heard in the Senate on Tuesday.  Some of the provisions included money for increases to the physician reimbursement, more money for critical access hospitals, dollars for non-emergency transportation, additional reimbursement for home health providers including those who provide for pediatric home care visits, additional funding for historically minority-owned hospitals, etc.  More details will be forthcoming about the budget in a future Report. 

Senate Insurance and Labor Committee 

          A number of bills were on the Committee’s agenda.  It passed out several which will proceed to the Senate Rules Committee: 

HB 68 – Sen. Doug Haines presented this bill which amends Chapter 8 of Title 34 concerning domestic employees and contributions made by their employers.  Specifically, the bill states: 

“Contributions shall accrue from each employer for each calendar year in which the employer is subject to this chapter with respect to wages payable for employment, except as provided in Code Sections 34-8-158 through 34-8-162.  Such contributions shall become due and be paid before the last day of the month next following the end of the calendar quarter to which they apply, in accordance with such regulations as the Commissioner may prescribe; provided, however, that with respect to employers as defined in paragraph (2) of subsection (a) of Code Section 34-8-33, the Commissioner shall provide by regulation that such contributions shall become due and be paid on an annual basis not later than such date as shall be prescribed by resolution of the Commissioner.  Such contributions shall become delinquent if not paid when due and shall not be deducted, in whole or in part, from the wages of individuals in such employer's employ.” 

HB 169 –Rep. Channell’s bill was carried by Sen. Greg Hecht in the Committee.  The bill amends the Insurance Code at O.C.G.A. § 33-24-59.5, relating to timely payment of health benefits, notification of failure to pay, and penalty for violation, by striking subsection (c) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: “(c) Each insurer shall pay to the insured or other person claiming payments under the health benefit plan interest equal to 18 percent per annum on the proceeds or benefits due under the terms of such plan for failure to comply with subsection (b) of this Code section.  No amount of any such interest penalty shall be applied toward any cap on benefits payable to the insured or other person claiming payments under the health benefit plan.”  The State’s Consumer’s Insurance Advocate, Cathey Steinberg, requested that amendments be placed on the bill, basically taking language from SB 282 concerning when precertifications for hospital stays or procedures may be performed, and adding that language into HB 169. Also, the bill was amended so as to prevent any penalty imposed on an insurance company for a violation of the prompt pay law being passed along to the consumer.  Sen. Cable and Sen. Lamutt raised concerns about these amendments – such as, would they only serve to slow down precertifications, etc. 

HB 233 – Rep. Keith Heard’s bill regarding insurance premium finance companies found in Chapter 22 of Title 33 also passed with no discussion. 

HB 730 – This bill concerning a supplemental appropriation for the Department of Labor for employment security, which is done every two years, was also passed with no discussion. 

HB 565 – Chairman Jimmy Lord and Rep. Mark Burkhalter’s bill concerning autism also passed out of the Committee with no discussion.  The bill would require that “an insurer that provides benefits for neurological disorders, whether under a group or individual accident and sickness contract, policy, or benefit plan, shall not deny providing benefits in accordance with the conditions, schedule of benefits, limitations as to type and scope of treatment authorized for neurological disorders, exclusions, cost sharing arrangements, or copayment requirements which exist in such contract, policy, or benefit plan for neurological disorders because of a diagnosis of autism.  The provisions of this subsection shall not expand the type or scope of treatment beyond that authorized for any other diagnosed neurological disorder.”

HB 525 – Rep. Sally Harrell presented her bill concerning maternity benefits disclosure to expectant women.  She argued that the current law has a loophole and this bill is intended to require insurance companies to give notice to policyholders about their maternity benefits.  She explained that she had a personal experience with her insurance company at the time of her first child’s birth – she was told by the contracted provider that she would have to leave the hospital within 24 hours after her delivery.  She explained that she also was told this in a video presentation by the provider.  The 1996 law requires a mandatory stay in a hospital of 48 hours for a vaginal birth and 96 hours for a c-section delivery.  There was some discussion about whether this notice could be given by phone, in person, or by mail.   There was also some discussion that this new proposal would not impact the State’s Medicaid program or self-insured plans.  Sens. Lamutt and Seabaugh voted against the bill, but the bill passed. 

HB 187 – This bill also passed out of the Committee by a Substitute version.  The bill deals with uninsured motorist coverage and whether those amounts would be the same as a person’s liability coverage.  

          Sen. Robert Brown indicated that his Committee would be holding meetings in the interim between the end of this Session and the Session for 2002.  Specifically, his Committee would have Subcommittees hearing SB 148 (the bill relating to the contractual issues that Northside Hospital precludes other hospitals such as North Fulton from participating in managed care contracts) as well as other questions of similar nature which have arisen around the State.  Also, a Subcommittee would hear SB 63 regarding the Consumer Choice Negotiated Health Insurance Plan Act wherein insurance mandates would not be applied if an employer and insurer selected to do so. 

Senate Health and Human Services Committee 

          This Committee also met and passed out the following bills: 

HB 470 – Rep. Mickey Channell’s bill for the Department of Community Health which has a number of provisions including amendments to the Indigent Care Trust Fund and how health plans must submit payments.  Specifically, it states in Section 8 of the bill at O.C.G.A. § 49-4-148: 

“(a) Should medical assistance be paid in behalf of a recipient of medical assistance on account of any sickness, injury, disease, or disability for which another person is legally liable, the Department of Community Health may seek reimbursement for such medical assistance from such other person.  The department shall be subrogated, but only to the extent of the reasonable value of the medical assistance paid and attributable to such sickness, injury, disease, or disability, to the rights of the recipient of medical assistance against the person so legally liable; the commissioner of community health may compromise, settle, and execute a release of any such claim or waive, expressly, any such claim, in whole or in part, for the convenience of the Department of Community Health.  This Code section is cumulative of the remedies of the Department of Community Health which specifically include, but are not limited to, the use of hospital liens as provided in Code Sections 44-14-470 through 44-14-477; and further, the payment of medical assistance to a hospital provider shall in no way be construed to discharge the obligation of a third party to satisfy a hospital lien.
(b) All insurers, as defined in O.C.G.A. 33-24-57.1, including but not limited to group health plans as defined in Section 607(1) of the Federal Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 and managed care entities as defined in Code Section 33-20A-3, which offer health benefit plans, as defined in Code Section 33-24-57.1, shall comply with this subsection. Those insurers shall:
(1) Cooperate with the department in determining whether a person who is a recipient of medical assistance may be covered under that insurer's health benefit plan and eligible to receive benefits thereunder for the medical services for which that medical assistance was provided;
(2) Accept the department's authorization for the provision of medical services on behalf of a recipient of medical assistance as the insurer's authorization for the provision of those services; and
(3) Comply with the requirements of Code Section 33-24-59.5, regarding the timely payment of claims submitted by the department for medical services provided to a recipient of medical assistance and covered by the health benefit plan, subject to the payment to the department of interest as provided in that Code section for failure to comply.
The requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection shall only apply to a health benefit plan which is issued, issued for delivery, delivered, or renewed on or after this subsection first becomes effective in 2001." 

HB 241 – This is Rep. Lester Jackson’s amendment to O.C.G.A. § 43-11-52 creating the Georgia Volunteers in Dentistry Act. 

HB 285 – Rep. Buddy Childers’ bill concerning who may operate eye banks (that is, a not-for-profit entity) also was passed by the Committee. 

HB 383 – This amends the current law at O.C.G.A. § 43-34-103 concerning the number of physician’s assistants who may be under the supervision of any one physician.  Currently, the law allows for two physician assistants.  This bill raises that number to four.