NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.
Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
SPONSOR: | Miera | DATE TYPED: | 02/13/01 | HB | 393 | ||
SHORT TITLE: | Massage Therapy Practice Act | SB | |||||
ANALYST: | Valdes |
Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||||
FY01 | FY02 | FY01 | FY02 | ||
NFI |
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Massage Therapy Board, Regulation and Licensing Department
Health Policy Commission
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
The purpose of House Bill 393 is to add exemptions to the Massage Therapy Practice Act which were inadvertently deleted in legislation adopted last year.
Significant Issues
The bill provides an exemption from the Massage Therapy Act for the following:
TECHNICAL ISSUES
In the opinion of the Health Policy Commission, language in bill is unclear. It seems to prevent some professionals from rendering massage therapy and allows others that do not meet the licensure requirements.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
According to the Massage Therapy Board, if this bill is not enacted, it is possible massage therapy students could not legally provide massage therapy within the course of study. It is vital to the practice of massage therapy that hands-on massage therapy training be allowed within the course of study by students at registered massage therapy schools.
The Health Policy Commission provided the following comments on the bill:
MFV/njw:ar