MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE AND LABOR
Sixty-seventh Session
May 26, 1993
The Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor was called to order by Chairman Randolph J. Townsend, at 8:30 a.m., on Wednesday, May 26, 1993, in Room 227 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
Senator Sue Lowden, Vice Chairman
Senator Ann O'Connell
Senator Mike McGinness
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer
Senator Leonard V. Nevin
Senator Lori L. Brown
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Matthew Q. Callister, Senate District 8
Assemblyman Peter G. Ernaut, Assembly District 37
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Denise Pinnock, Committee Secretary
Brian Davie, Senior Research Analyst
OTHERS PRESENT:
Dr. Robert Pearson, Optometrist, Nevada State Board of Optometry
J. Thomas Susich, Counsel, Nevada State Board of Optometry
Fred Hillerby, Lobbyist, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Nevada
Bob Barengo, Lobbyist, Lenscrafters
Dave Mello, President, Board of Dispensing Opticians, State of Nevada
David Stuart, Treasurer, Board of Dispensing Opticians, State of Nevada
Jim Wadhams, Lobbyist, Nevada Health Underwriters
Terry Rankin, Commissioner, Department of Insurance, State of Nevada
Marie Soldo, Lobbyist, Sierra Health Services
Guy Perkins, Associate Life/Health Actuary, Department of Insurance, State of Nevada
Chairman Townsend called the meeting to order and introduced Senator Matthew Q. Callister, Senate District 8. Senator Callister was present to suggest an amendment to Senate Bill (S.B.) 375.
SENATE BILL 375: Makes various changes relating to solicitation by telephone.
Senator Callister explained he would be proposing an amendment on the senate floor which would remove the exemption for publicly traded companies. He said the nontraditional telemarketers were already well protected by existing exemptions. Senator Callister expressed concern that some of the larger telemarketing companies would be able to buy a publicly traded shell to take advantage of that exemption.
Senator Shaffer was skeptical about whether a company with enough money to become publicly traded would be inclined to pick up and move, as is the problem currently.
Senator Callister said the point was not that they would or would not move at the first sign of trouble, but that those companies could not even be regulated because they would be exempt. He also pointed out that those companies would no longer be taxed as telemarketers.
Senator Nevin said the representatives of the industry he had spoken to saw no problem with either leaving the exemption in the bill or taking it out.
Senator Callister suggested the use of a letter of intent, and explained to the committee the purpose of letters of intent.
Senator Townsend instructed Brian Davie, Senior Research Analyst, that if the amendment passed on the floor he wanted a letter of intent sent to the attorney general. (Exhibit C was supplied at a later date.)
Senator Nevin said he was under the impression the committee had covered their intent in the bill. Senator Townsend acknowledged his feeling, but said a letter of intent would be a double insurance that the committee's wishes are understood.
Senator Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 375. He introduced two bill draft requests (BDRs).
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 52-1282: Makes various changes in statutes governing consumer affairs.
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 43-1164: Repeal requirements for certificates of dismantling.
SENATOR SHAFFER MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDRS 52-1282 AND 43-1164.
SENATOR NEVIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Senator Townsend opened the hearing on S.B. 248.
SENATE BILL 248: Increases certain fees and fines related to practice of optometry.
Dr. Robert Pearson, Optometrist, Nevada State Board of Optometry, explained that the bill is essentially a request to increase some of the fees the board charges. He said the board had not increased fees in 10 years.
Senator O'Connell asked whether part of the need for the increase is to pay the administrator the reorganization would put the board under. Dr. Pearson said it is not. He stated the cost of that administrator would be about $400 to $500 the first year, and $600 to $700 the second year.
Senator Brown asked if there are different licensing costs for practicing and nonpracticing optometrists. Dr. Pearson stated there are not.
J. Thomas Susich, Counsel, Nevada State Board of Optometry, submitted written testimony explaining both S.B. 247 and 248 (Exhibit D).
SENATE BILL 247: Makes various changes to provisions governing practice of optometry.
Senator Townsend asked what the most common issue is in their field which required disciplinary action. Mr. Susich said the biggest problem is misleading advertising.
Senator Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 248 and opened the hearing on S.B. 247. Dr. Pearson explained the bill would allow the board to use a national testing service. He stated most licensees favor going to national exams.
Bob Barengo, Lobbyist, Lenscrafters, submitted a proposed amendment to S.B. 247 (Exhibit E). He said the Nevada State Board of Optometry has agreed to the language, but that both parties would like to see the bill after the bill drafters have finished with it.
Mr. Susich stated the Nevada State Board of Optometry would not oppose the amendment suggested by Lenscrafters.
Dave Mello, President, Board of Dispensing Opticians, State of Nevada, stated his organization objects to one line of the bill. On page 13, line 43, Mr. Mello said, the bill attempts to restrict trade. He explained the language would tend to make consumers fill their prescriptions with the optometrist only, instead of possibly going to an optician. The Board of Dispensing Opticians' legal counsel had stated it would restrict trade.
Mr. Susich said he thought the conflict is that the opticians desires to have a certain amount of flexibility with the prescription once they get it, and the optometrists want the ability to instruct, through the prescription, how the prescription should be filled.
Senator Townsend asked if current statutes allow for the optician to call the optometrist and obtain the prescription for a patient. Mr. Mello said it did, but explained that other states are passing legislation which would prohibit the transmission of prescriptions over the telephone.
Senator Lowden asked if there had been mistakes made in that manner. Dr. Pearson had not had a problem with mistakes being made over the telephone.
Senator O'Connell asked Dr. Pearson if he is aware of the concerns of the Board of Dispensing Opticians, and whether the Nevada State Board of Optometry has any intention of trying to limit any trade on the part of the opticians. Dr. Pearson stated the Nevada State Board of Optometrists was not aware of Mr. Mello's concerns, and have no intention to affect trade at all.
Senator O'Connell suggested Mr. Mello, Dr. Pearson, and the attorney for the Board of Dispensing Opticians confer and try to work out agreeable language.
David Stuart, Treasurer, Board of Dispensing Opticians, State of Nevada, said expiration dates hinder more than help. He also stated concern about the specificity of filling prescriptions.
Senator Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 247 and opened the hearing on S.B. 467.
SENATE BILL 467: Makes various changes relating to group insurance.
Jim Wadhams, Lobbyist, Nevada Health Underwriters, explained the bill.
Senator Townsend asked that Terry Rankin, Commissioner, Department of Insurance, State of Nevada, Marie Soldo, Lobbyist, Sierra Health Services, and Mr. Wadhams meet with Fred Hillerby, Lobbyist, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Nevada, to work out differences. Mr. Hillerby submitted a copy of Nevada Revised Statutes 687B.355 (Exhibit F).
Senator O'Connell asked what need there is for the changes being proposed. Mr. Wadhams explained the changes would simplify what is already in practice.
Senator Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 467. He asked that the senators who still had bills in subcommittee work to get them back to the committee.
Senator Townsend opened the hearing on A.B. 574.
ASSEMBLY BILL 574: Clarifies that coverage for medical expenses under policy of motor vehicle insurance is primary.
Senator Townsend said:
We have, in this committee, A.B. 574 which is an industrial insurance bill. It came from the [Assembly] Committee on Commerce on the other side. The process by which the assembly has gone is going to require at least an additional week because of the amount of the amendments before they can even get it to the floor. As a result I think that it's appropriate that we give them one more tool with which to deal with the [State Industrial Insurance System] SIIS problem, which is to amend A.B. 574 with Amendment No. 616, which is, in fact, S.B. 316, and place it into that bill, and send it to them so they can have an option with which to process work comp[ensation].
SENATOR O'CONNELL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 574 WITH AMENDMENT NO. 616.
SENATOR LOWDEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Nevin was curious whether anyone had talked to the chairman of the Assembly Committee on Commerce, to get a feel for what he intended to do. Senator Townsend stated:
The discussion with leadership is that they would like to have the option so that if they receive the bill that was processed last evening, S.B. 316, approximately a week from now, once it has been amended, they can either choose to send it to the floor or they can choose to send it to [the Assembly Committee on] Commerce. This gives them one more option. I don't think they've made that determination. This just gives them one more option with which to deal with it. They can amend this like they did the other one.
Senator Nevin said, "That's my concern. We're just throwing another bill over there for them to play with."
Senator O'Connell pointed out the amended bill was what the Committee on Commerce had received, not the original.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS NEVIN AND BROWN VOTED NO.)
* * * * *
Assemblyman Peter G. Ernaut, Assembly District 37, thanked the committee for the opportunity to deal with the original S.B. 316.
Senator Nevin stated he fully supported S.B. 316 as drafted by the Committee on Commerce and Labor. He voted no because he had not talked to Assemblyman Gene Porter to find out what he intended to do.
Senator Townsend stated Senator Nevin made a good point, but that they would never blindside the majority leader of the assembly. Senator Townsend said Mr. Porter was aware of the business the committee had just voted on.
Senator Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 574 and opened the discussion on health insurance issues.
Ms. Rankin introduced Guy Perkins, Associate Life/Health Actuary, Department of Insurance, State of Nevada. She submitted a packet of information on health insurance (Exhibit G).
Mr. Perkins reviewed for the committee information he learned recently at a symposium in Washington, D.C.. Senator Townsend clarified that the federal policy on insurance was slowly evolving because of the sheer enormity of the issue.
There followed general discussion between Mr. Perkins and the committee regarding Exhibit G.
Senator O'Connell asked if there had been any price tags placed yet. Mr. Perkins stated there had not been, as yet, but he expected there would be.
Senator Brown asked if anyone would be precluded for certain congenital defects. Mr. Perkins stated his understanding is that everyone would have access to coverage.
Mr. Perkins said there would no longer be group ratings. There would be community ratings where lifestyle choices are not considered. He said that pre-existing health conditions might be handled with risk pools.
Senator Shaffer asked if there had been discussion of integrating workers' compensation into the package. Mr. Perkins stated there was some discussion, but that the federal package would not include workers' compensation at this time.
Senator Townsend thanked Mr. Perkins and Ms. Rankin for their presentation. As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Denise Pinnock,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor
May 26, 1993
Page 1