Florida Constitution Revision Commission Drops Certificate of Need Revamp
Gov. Rick Scott's long-standing priority to eliminate Florida's certificate-of-need program for Florida hospitals came to a halt, after a member of a powerful panel withdrew a proposal that would have overhauled the current hospital-approval system.
April 03, 2018 at 12:01 PM
3 minute read
Gov. Rick Scott's long-standing priority to eliminate Florida's certificate-of-need program for Florida hospitals came to a halt, after a member of a powerful panel withdrew a proposal that would have overhauled the current hospital-approval system.
Constitution Revision Commission member Frank Kruppenbacher on Monday withdrew Proposal 54, which would have tied new hospital growth in the state to hospital-acquired infection rates at existing facilities.
Lindy Kennedy, executive vice president of the Safety Net Hospital Alliance of Florida, praised the removal of the proposal.
“Preserving Florida's health care strategic planning process is vital for a strong safety net hospital system which provides the most highly specialized medical care regardless of a patient's ability to pay,” Kennedy said in a statement. “With fewer commercially insured patients to help cover the costs of caring for the poor and uninsured, safety net hospitals would have been forced to cut vital services that benefit all Floridians, such as neonatal care, trauma, burn, and transplants.''
Though the proposal didn't mention the words “certificate of need,” it would have the effect of circumventing the regulatory process that has required hospitals to get state approval before adding facilities or offering expanded services.
The measure only would have had an impact on so-called CONs for hospitals and wouldn't have affected regulations for nursing homes or hospices.
“The governor looks forward to reviewing every proposal the CRC puts forth,” Scott spokesman McKinley Lewis said in a statement.
While Scott, who appointed Kruppenbacher to the commission, may review the proposals, the governor doesn't have any authority over which measures make it to the ballot.
Kruppenbacher in March told commission members that the proposed constitutional amendment was necessary because it would be the only way the state would ever be able to scrap the certificate-of-need system.
“It's not going to get fixed in this building,” Kruppenbacher said at the time, referring to the Capitol where the CRC had been meeting. “It's just not. The history and the record of the lobbying and the hold on the Legislature that health care has is going to prevent it.”
A former hospital executive, Scott has long tried to eliminate the certificate-of-need program for Florida hospitals.
In 2015, Scott appointed a hospital and health care commission, which issued a final report supporting a “thorough re-examination of the CON program to measure its current impact on competition, quality, and cost in Florida.” The 2015 commission also supported a repeal of the process, if appropriate.
The CRC meets every 20 years and has the power to place proposed constitutional amendments directly on the November ballot. Ultimately, 60 percent of voters would have to approve any constitutional amendments.
Kruppenbacher's was the third health care-related proposal pulled from consideration in recent weeks.
CRC member Jeanette Nunez withdrew her proposal to eliminate a constitutional requirement that the state set aside 30 percent of overall tobacco-education and prevention funding for an edgy advertising and marketing campaign.
And CRC member Brecht Heuchen withdrew his proposed amendment that would have added a “residents' bill of rights” to the constitution for those living in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
Christine Sexton reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste Class Action
3 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readDisbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
- 2Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Offices & Dragons
- 3Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
- 4Transforming Dispute Processes in Law: The Impact of Large Language Models
- 5Daniel Habib to Serve as Next Attorney-in-Charge of NY Federal Defender Appeals Unit
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250