MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE Sixty-eighth Session June 14, 1995 The Committee on Commerce was called to order at 3:40 p.m., on Wednesday, June 14, 1995, by the presiding Chairman, Sandra Tiffany, in Room 332 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda, Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Larry L. Spitler, Chairman Ms. Sandra Tiffany, Chairman Ms. Maureen E. Brower, Vice Chairman Mr. Richard Perkins, Vice Chairman Mr. Dennis L. Allard Ms. Barbara E. Buckley Mr. Thomas A. Fettic Ms. Chris Giunchigliani Mr. Lynn Hettrick Mr. David E. Humke Mr. Michael (Mike) Schneider COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXCUSED: Mr. Morse Arberry, Jr. STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Mouritsen, Research Analyst OTHERS PRESENT: Bob Feldman, President Nevada General Insurance Company John Vergiels, Insurance America Rich Meyers, Nevada Trial Lawyers' Association Paula Berkley, Nevada State Board of Landscape Architects Following roll call, Chairman Brower opened the hearing on A.B. 689. ASSEMBLY BILL 689 - Establishes system of insurance for operation of motor vehicle in which liability is not based upon fault. Bob Feldman, President of Auto Insurance American, and President Nevada General Insurance Company, submitted a paper entitled "National Underwriter" (Exhibit C), and went on to describe the severe problems associated with auto insurance costs in Hawaii, and the difficulties experienced in insurance markets where all companies had withdrawn from the state. Many bills had been passed over the years, Mr. Feldman related, including one which required insurance companies to insure low- income parties free. None of these efforts had succeeded. Thus, Mr. Feldman said, in May 1995, Hawaii had passed the first "no-fault" insurance bill in the United States where it completely restricted and prohibited people from suing, even for serious injury. (See Exhibit D). Though he personally did not approve of this type of legislation, the legislation they were proposing was a bill which primarily restricted "pain and suffering" awards on soft tissue minor injuries. It had been started in 1985 and through the years had been modified several times. Mr. Feldman continued with an explanation of the bill. He explained it would allow a person to choose their own company, and contained a provision which allowed a person to purchase the right to sue for minor injuries. He acknowledged this provision was expensive, but it was possible. Every policy under this system included liability insurance for out-of-state travel. It also included regulation of doctors and hospitals, by tying down the charges which could be made to an auto accident victim, and bound them directly into the state SIIS system. Since the bill was very complex, Mr. Feldman suggested it needed a substantial amount of study by the insurance companies, actuaries and the trial bar. He asked the committee to appoint an interim legislative committee to study the subject of "no-fault" auto insurance in order to provide the Legislature with a complete package next Session. Adding to Mr. Feldman's testimony, former Senator John Vergiels, now representing Insurance America, said he, also, was asking the Assembly Commerce committee to place the proposed legislation with an interim study group. Unless the committee anticipated the Session lasting into the month of July, Mr. Vergiels believed the bill should be withdrawn until there was more time for study. Speaking in opposition to the bill, Rich Meyers, Nevada Trial Lawyers' Association, said there had, indeed, been negotiations. He believed the move to withdraw the bill and bring it into an interim study group was completely up to the committee, and was not a suggestion necessarily being put forward by the Nevada Trial Lawyers. In terms of interim studies, Mr. Spitler noted this decision could not be made by the committee. In order to do this, he suggested the bill would have to be amended to a Resolution, and then referred to Elections and Procedures. He said he understood there were a very limited number of studies being planned, and he was not sure whether this issue could be studied during the interim. Therefore, it was his understanding this would have to be indefinitely postponed, and the proponents would have to work through a different committee to determine what would be studied on an interim basis. Mr. Vergiels concurred with Mr. Spitler's assessment. ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 689. ASSEMBLYMAN FETTIC SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. (ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY AND HETTRICK WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) Vice Chairman Brower announced the committee would take action on a number of bills. ASSEMBLY BILL 596 - Revises provisions governing coordination of benefits under certain group health insurance policies. Co-Chairman Spitler reminded the committee they had first heard this bill on May 29, 1995, and again on June 5, 1995. Ms. Giunchigliani said after the hearing on June 5, 1995, she had worked with the Insurance Commissioner, Alice Molasky, and had learned the proponent had asked for the bill to be indefinitely postponed. ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 596. ASSEMBLYMAN ALLARD SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. (ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY AND TIFFANY WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) ASSEMBLY BILL 647 - Makes various changes regarding provision of health care services and medical equipment by health maintenance organizations. The sponsor of the bill, Vice Chairman Brower, reviewed the amendments which had been proposed for this bill (Exhibit E). Ms. Brower noted two corrections shown under "Page2, Section 3, paragraph 3. The enrollee has been under the care of the [provider] supplier for that condition for not less than [30 days] 1 year." ASSEMBLYMAN ALLARD MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 647. ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Schneider asked if Ms. Brower had discussed these amendments with any of the Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) representatives, and what had been the reaction. She replied that she had not discussed these with HMO representatives. Co-Chairman Spitler said he could not support this bill as it did, in his opinion, greatly impact HMO concepts. Ms. Buckley declared she understood and supported the intent of the bill, but she was concerned about the structure of the HMOs. While she might change her mind when the bill came before the General Assembly, at this point she could not support either the bill or the motion. Ms. Giunchigliani announced her support. She said she did believe the HMO structure supported the issue of capitated rates, but this bill would not provide the "gate keeper" system, which unfortunately still existed. She opined the bill would not break down the fabric of an HMO, but did believe it would allow continuity of care for someone with a serious condition such as cancer, where a bond had been developed with one doctor. This would allow for that person's treatment to be continued, rather than being interrupted with the person's insurance being changed to an HMO. THE MOTION FAILED. (ASSEMBLYMEN ALLARD, BROWER, FETTIC AND GIUNCHIGLIANI VOTED YES, ALL OTHERS VOTED NO. ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY AND HETTRICK WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) There was a suggestion from Mr. Humke that perhaps the bill should be amended and then returned to the committee for consideration in its amended form. Ms. Brower agreed. ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE MOVED TO AMEND AND REREFER A.B. 647 BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ASSEMBLYMAN ALLARD SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. (ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY AND HETTRICK WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) ASSEMBLY BILL 649 - Provides for certification of inspectors of real estate. Co-Chairman Spitler indicated he had spoken with the sponsor of this bill, Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, after certain news stories had appeared in Las Vegas newspapers, substantiating the claims of the proponents of the bill. Mr. Spitler recalled the testimony had been somewhat weak when the bill was previously heard, and there had been disagreement on which agency would house the association -- the State Contractors' Board or the Real Estate Division. Co- Chairman Spitler asked Mr. Schneider to work on the areas of the bill which needed clarification. Mr. Schneider said there were people coming up from Las Vegas the next day to talk to committee members, and they might stay to testify at the following Commerce Committee meeting. If there was an intent to get the bill processed before the end of Session, Mr. Spitler said it was essential to take action as quickly as possible. Mr. Humke volunteered to assist Mr. Schneider in working on the special concerns expressed regarding this bill. Mr. Allard noted his main concern continued to be the fact the regulations prescribed for education and experience would be governed by the Real Estate Division, and in a previous meeting he had stated his opinion that the Real Estate Division did not have the expertise to regulate home inspectors. In conversations with industry representatives from Las Vegas, Mr. Schneider said, he had been apprised of a home inspection business which purportedly guaranteed their customers' air condition and hearing units for $160 as part of the home inspection. In fact, he noted, this actually came within the purview of the Insurance Commissioner. This incident supported the need for the bill. Vice Chairman Brower asked Mr. Humke and Mr. Schneider to bring something back to the committee by the following Friday. Mr. Allard suggested Mr. Schneider and Mr. Humke approach the State Contractors' Board and ask them to draw up regulations if there was, indeed, the intention to form an association to regulate the industry. ASSEMBLY BILL 690 - Revises provisions governing practice of podiatry. Reviewing, Ms. Buckley recalled her only concern had been the fee proposed. While she did not oppose allowing the actual cost of the fee, she opposed approval of an additional amount; nor did she mind building in certain increases, but she believed to allow a fee of $1,000 based on an actual fee of $440 was excessive. Mr. Spitler recalled a maximum figure of $600 for the test. After discussion, Ms. Buckley suggested a figure of $200 be written into the bill which more accurately covered the organization's overhead expenses. ASSEMBLYMAN SPITLER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS, WITH THE LANGUAGE ON PAGE 1, LINE 24 BEING CHANGED TO $200. ASSEMBLYMAN BUCKLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. (ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY AND GIUNCHIGLIANI WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) SENATE BILL 193 - Prohibits use of designation or abbreviation which indicates person is licensed or registered dietitian under certain circumstances. In conversation with the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Spitler reported they had agreed that deleting Section 10 would make the bill more palatable. Mr. Hettrick agreed with the deletion of Section 10, but also expressed some concern with Sections 7 and 8. Referring to page 2, lines 6 and 7, "... meals consistent with cultural background, social and economic status of a person or group ...," he believed this was nutritional counsel, but he had problems with it. Also, on line 10, regarding behavioral and social sciences in the practice of dietetic, Mr. Hettrick opposed this kind of provision being within a dietitian's purview. Mr. Spitler said when he had talked to Mr. Guild about taking out Section 10, the bill drafters had indicated the need for Section 7 or 8 in order to have a titling bill. Mr. Spitler asked the Principal Research Analyst, Paul Mouritsen to: 1) Find out if Sections 7 and 8 were essential; and 2) if they were essential, whether there was less strict language with those items deleted. Mr. Mouritsen opined these were essential because the terms were cited in Section 10; however, the proposal was to delete Section 10. Discussion followed. SENATE BILL 404 - Provides for organization of banks as limited-liability companies. Mr. Spitler recalled this bill had been heard on June 7, 1995, and there had been no opposing testimony. ASSEMBLYMAN BUCKLEY MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 404. ASSEMBLYMAN ALLARD SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. (ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY AND GIUNCHIGLIANI WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) SENATE BILL 422 - Makes various changes relating to landscape architects. Representing the Nevada State Board of Landscape Architects, Paula Berkley came forward to explain the amendments proposed. The three amendments which had received a consensus were as follows: 1. Fees. Page 5, line 8. Changed the application fee from $300 to $200. 2. Page 5, line 5. Rather than "Application fee," term would be changed to "National Examination Application Fee." 3. Add language indicating all advertising and business cards of landscape architects must include the individual's license number. Calling attention to page 7, lines 27 through 29, Ms. Buckley observed the new language on lines 27 and 28 appeared to broaden the act. Ms. Berkley believed this language applied to a situation which went beyond the ordinary person's capability. Ms. Buckley expressed opposition to overregulation. If a small businessman had set up a business of taking care of lawns, she did not necessarily see that person as someone who needed approval by a Board as a landscape architect. Responding, Ms. Berkley said this was not the intention. As long as an individual did not purport to be a "landscape architect" they could continue in their occupation without being licensed. If, however, the individual advertised himself/herself as a "landscape architect," they would, indeed, need to be approved and licensed. ASSEMBLYMAN SPITLER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 422. ASSEMBLYMAN FETTIC SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED. (ASSEMBLYMAN BUCKLEY VOTED NO, ALL OTHERS VOTED YES. ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY, GIUNCHIGLIANI AND HETTRICK WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) SENATE BILL 447 - Provides for confidentiality of certain records or information obtained by board of homeopathic medical examiners during investigation. Last heard on June 5, 1995, Mr. Spitler recalled testimony which had stated the bill provided language consistent with Medical Board practices. ASSEMBLYMAN SCHNEIDER MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 447. ASSEMBLYMAN ALLARD SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. (ASSEMBLYMEN ARBERRY, TIFFANY, GIUNCHIGLIANI AND HETTRICK WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) SENATE BILL 72 - SECOND REPRINT - Prohibits practice of respiratory care without certification by national organization. Mr. Spitler asked Mr. Allard if he was aware of any changes to the bill at this point. He said he had received a FAX transmission, and wished staff to look at all the communication received, to make certain all concerns were addressed, and the amendments matched those requested. He suggested the committee hold the bill until the following committee meeting. With no further testimony forthcoming, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: _____________________________ Iris Bellinger, Committee Secretary Assembly Committee on Commerce June 14, 1995 Page