BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                AB 646
                                                                Page  1


        ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
        AB 646 (Swanson)
        As Amended May 5, 2009
        Majority vote

         BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS      6-4 HEALTH           14-0            
         
         ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
        |Ayes:|Eng, Hernandez, Nava,     |Ayes:|Jones, Ammiano, Block,     |
        |     |Niello,                   |     |Carter, Conway, De La      |
        |     |John A. Perez, Price      |     |Torre, De Leon, Hall,      |
        |     |                          |     |Hernandez, Bonnie          |
        |     |                          |     |Lowenthal, Nava, V. Manuel |
        |     |                          |     |Perez, Salas,              |
        |     |                          |     |Audra Strickland           |
        |     |                          |     |                           |
        |-----+--------------------------+-----+---------------------------|
        |Nays:|Hayashi, Emmerson,        |     |                           |
        |     |Conway, Smyth             |     |                           |
         ------------------------------------------------------------------ 

         APPROPRIATIONS      15-0                                        
         
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
        |Ayes:|De Leon, Nielsen,         |     |                          |
        |     |Ammiano,                  |     |                          |
        |     |Charles Calderon, Davis,  |     |                          |
        |     |Duvall, Fuentes, Hall,    |     |                          |
        |     |Harkey, John A. Perez,    |     |                          |
        |     |Price, Skinner, Solorio,  |     |                          |
        |     |Audra Strickland,         |     |                          |
        |     |Torlakson                 |     |                          |
        |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
        |     |                          |     |                          |
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
         SUMMARY  :  Permits health care districts (districts) to directly  
        employ physicians and surgeons, as specified.  Specifically,  this  
        bill  :  

        1)Permits a district to employ physicians and surgeons and charge  
          for their professional services, if the physician and surgeon in  
          whose name the charges are made approves the charges, and if:

           a)   The service area of the district includes a Medically  
             Underserved Area or a Medically Underserved Population, or has  







                                                                AB 646
                                                                Page  2


             been federally designated as a Health Professional Shortage  
             Area; and,

           b)   Requires the chief executive officer of the district to:

             i)     Document that the district has been actively attempting  
               and unable to recruit a primary or specialty care physician  
               and surgeon for any 12 consecutive month period, beginning on  
               or after July 1, 2008; and,

             ii)    Submit an application to the Medical Board of California  
               (MBC) certifying the district's inability to recruit one or  
               more physicians and surgeons, including all relevant  
               documentation, certifying that the inability to recruit  
               primary or specialty care physicians and surgeons has  
               negatively impacted patient care in the community, and that  
               the employment of physicians and surgeons by the district  
               would meet a critical, unmet need in the community based upon  
               a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the  
               number of patients referred for care outside of the  
               community, the number of patients who experienced delays in  
               treatment, the length of treatment delays, and negative  
               patient outcomes.

        2)Requires the MBC to approve and authorize the employment of up to  
          ten primary or specialty care physicians and surgeons by the  
          district, upon receipt and review of the certification and  
          subsequent certification of the district's inability to recruit a  
          physician and surgeon.

        3)Requires that employment contracts with physicians and surgeons be  
          for a period of not more than 10 years, but provides that they may  
          be renewed or extended until December 31, 2020.

        4)Requires the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development,  
          in consultation with the State Department of Public Health and the  
          MBC, to conduct an efficacy study of this program to evaluate and  
          report to the Legislature no later than June 1, 2018:

           a)   Improvement in physician and surgeon recruitment and  
             retention in the districts participating in the program; 

           b)   Impacts on physician and surgeon and health care access in  
             the communities served by these districts; 








                                                                AB 646
                                                                Page  3


           c)   Impacts on patient outcomes;

           d)   Degree of patient and participating physician and surgeon  
             satisfaction; and,

           e)   Impacts on the independence and autonomy of medical  
             decisionmaking by employed physicians and surgeons. 

        5)Prohibits districts authorized to employ physicians and surgeons  
          from interfering with, controlling, or otherwise directing a  
          physician and surgeon's professional judgment, as specified, under  
          penalty of punishment. 

        6)Deletes the 2003 pilot project permitting certain hospitals to  
          directly employ physicians and surgeons, as specified.

         FISCAL EFFECT  :   According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee,  
        this bill requires unknown fee-supported special fund cost of less  
        than $50,000 to OSHPD to complete the evaluation and submit a report  
        to the Legislature in 2019.

         COMMENTS  :  The corporate practice of medicine (CPM) is typically  
        referred to in the context of a prohibition, banning hospitals from  
        employing physicians.  CPM evolved in the early 20th century when  
        mining companies had to hire physicians directly to provide care for  
        their employees in remote areas.  However, problems arose when  
        physicians' loyalty to the mining companies conflicted with  
        patients' needs.  Eventually, physicians, courts, and legislatures  
        prohibited CPM in an effort to preserve physicians' autonomy and  
        improve patient care.

        California's 75 health care districts (HCDs) are voter-created local  
        government entities governed by publicly elected boards of trustees.  
         HCDs currently operate 46 of California's 72 public hospitals,  
        providing health care services to over 2 million Californians  
        annually.  HCDs are subject to California's CPM prohibition.  This  
        bill would enable 46 HCD hospitals and approximately 130 other  
        public, independent community nonprofit hospitals and clinics to  
        hire physicians directly.   

        Advocates argue that physician recruitment is essential to the  
        continued existence of HCDs.  According to a 2007 California Medical  
        Association report, the average age of physicians in the rural and  
        underserved urban communities is approaching 60, with many of those  
        planning to retire in the next two years.  Co-sponsors of this bill,  







                                                                AB 646
                                                                Page  4


        the Association of California Healthcare Districts (ACHD) reports  
        that, "In their struggle to recruit and keep physicians, rural and  
        underserved urban communities in California must compete with large  
        physician groups, Kaiser, the state Department of Corrections, rural  
        hospitals in almost every other state in the nation as well as other  
        entities that may directly employ physicians."  

        Proponents of the bill argue that exempting HCDs from the CPM ban  
        will enable them to attract physicians by absorbing all of the  
        overhead and administrative duties of establishing a medical  
        practice, and providing a stable, competitive salary.

        Opponents argue that the bar on CPM is an important public policy  
        provision to ensure physician independence and the ability to  
        practice in the patient's best interests.  Some argue that the  
        difficulty in recruiting physicians in some parts of California is  
        more likely the result of declining reimbursement than physicians'  
        employment status.  This decline in reimbursement is driven by the  
        increased market dominance of large health care plans and insurers,  
        which would in no way be affected by this bill.   

        SB 326 (Chesbro) Chapter 411, Statutes of 2003, established a pilot  
        project permitting district hospitals meeting specific requirements  
        to hire and employ up to two physicians each, for a total of 20  
        physicians statewide, if the district hospital met the following  
        conditions: operates in a county of 750,000 or less population;  
        reported net operating losses in fiscal year 2000-01; and, has a  
        patient base of at least 50% combined Medi-Cal, Medicare, and  
        uninsured patients.  

        SB 326 required the MBC to administer and evaluate the project prior  
        to its sunset on January 1, 2011.  In its 2008 report, the MBC  
        stated that it was "challenged in evaluating the program and  
        preparing this report because the low number of participants did not  
        afford us sufficient information to prepare a valid analysis of the  
        pilot. ?[W]hile the Board supports the ban on the corporate practice  
        of medicine, it also believes there may be justification to extend  
        the pilot so that a better evaluation can be made. 

        "However, until there is sufficient data to perform a full analysis  
        of an expanded pilot, the Board contends that the statutes governing  
        the corporate practice of medicine should not be amended as a  
        solution to solve the problem of access to healthcare."









                                                                AB 646
                                                                Page  5


         Analysis Prepared by  :    Sarah Huchel / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301 
                                                                  FN: 0000893