U.S. DoJ slams CON laws

Anne Zieger — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:13:48 -0400

This week, officials from the U.S. Department of Justice are expected to tell Illinois officials what they've told officials in other states--that they think CON laws are best eliminated. Both the U.S. DoJ and the Federal Trade Commission have told officials in other states, including Florida and Alaska, that such laws aren't a good idea, as they lessen consumer choice, slow innovation and weaken markets' cost-cutting abilities. They note that most CON laws were drafted as a response to a 1974 federal law, which has since repealed, which offered states incentives to establish CON regs.

CON activity is even more suspect in Illinois, where there's been questions about how it was run. The panel that administers the program, the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, has been under scrutiny since 2004, when it was discovered that a member set up a system of kickbacks for himself in exchange for approval votes. Since then, the state's CON law has been renewed several times. Now, a task force evaluating the legislation has been asked to make a recommendation as to whether the law should be renewed.

To find out more about the CON evaluation process in IL:
- read this Modern Healthcare article (reg. req.)

Related Articles:
FL, IA legislatures pass CON reforms
FL governor wants to end CON law
GA to revamp CON system
AL study questions need for CON process

FTC slams IL physicians' retail clinic rules

Anne Zieger — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:13:53 -0400

In a move that could set back national physician efforts to control the evolution of retail clinics, the Federal Trade Commission has labeled retail clinic regs backed by Illinois doctors as anti-competitive and bad for consumers. The FTC letter criticizes a bill pending in the Illinois state legislature that would require permits for the facilities, limit their capacity for advertising and mandate greater physician involvement in their operations. It issued the critique at the request of a state legislator who asked for the agency's input on the pending bill.

The FTC, in short, said it didn't like what it saw. "Because several of the bill's requirements would pertain only to retail clinics--and not other health-care facilities offering the same services or staffing--those requirements could put retail clinics at a competitive disadvantage without offering countervailing consumer benefits," the agency said.

Even this critique may not stop the Illinois State Medical Society, which has been a vocal opponent of retail clinic models. However, the FTC's input has shaped how regulations have evolved in other states, such as Massachusetts, where state health officials dropped proposals to regulate retail clinic ads on FTC advice.

To learn more about the FTC's position:
- read this Chicago Tribune piece

Related Articles:
MA doctors protest CVS retail clinic expansion
AMA demands retail clinic regs, backs off ban
Doctors push law regulating retail clinics
Wal-Mart plans 2,000 retail clinics