April 23, 2002 - Sacramento - Senate Bill 1705 and Assembly Bill 1943 moved through their first committees. SB 1705 passed on a party-line 5-3 vote, while AB 1943 passed its second committee. The Council of Colleges,  ACAOM, and the Alliance testified in opposition to higher standards of education being proposed by AB 1943.

Controversial Testimony Mars Proceedings

Assembly Bill 1943 (Chu) passed out of the Assembly Health Committee on a 13-5 bipartisan vote.  Over 150 acupuncturists fill hearing room 4202, with some sitting in the fifth floor "peanut gallery" above. Assemblymember Helen Thomson, the biased but  fair-minded Chairperson, was very patient with the testimony, while a bit speedier than last week's Chair. Judy Chu was tactful and firm in her presentation of the merits of the bill. Many Chinese did not initially understand the time limit for testimony, but it was quite a sight when Thomson finally asked for all the supporters to stand up at once.... and stretch. Nearly the whole hearing room was on its feet, hands in the air. In spite of her earlier prohibition against applause, the Chair politely allowed a minute of it when the vote was finally counted, and then called for a ten-minute recess.

Draft amendments had been presented to the committee prior to the vote. These amendments would simplify AB1943 further, setting educational standards to 3000 hours for students entering in 2004, and stating that it was the legislatures "intent" to set the standard to 4000 hours in 2010, when it is likely that the any surviving AOM schools will be offering doctorate programs. The 450 hours CE for current licensees over ten years is still in the bill, but that could change.

  Opposition

Opposition testimony was provided by Liza Goldblatt (president of Oregon College of Oriental Medicine) and Steven Givens (faculty member of Bastyr University), both Executive Committee members of the Council of Colleges of Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine, and from Tom Haines, who represented the Pacific College of Oriental Medicine and the Alliance of Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine. Referring to their part-time participation on the Acupuncture Board's Competencies Task Force, Goldblatt and Givens discredited the work of the Task Force's recent 3000-hour recommendation, claiming that they "never discussed" competencies on the task force. Judy Chu followed their comments by reading straight from a Task Force agenda where it listed a "discussion of competencies" as an agenda item. Haines also attempted to mislead the committee members, claiming that the current ACAOM accreditation standards were 2,625 hours. Brian Fennen was able to correct this misinformation, stating that the 2,625 hours were proposed hours, with no certainty of being adopted, and that the current ACAOM accreditation standard is actually 2025 hours.

Goldblatt and Givens failed to mention that they had each attended only three of the five meetings of  the Competencies Task Force. In regards to their participation on the Task Force, Steven Givens and Tom Haines are on record as providing the only two dissenting votes against a recommendation to adopt a competencies statement for diagnostic abilities. Goldblatt and Givens had also signed two letters from the Council of Colleges opposing the Task Force proceedings that they were participating in. But, worse was to come.

In one of her most unfriendly gestures towards the profession made to date, Goldblatt suggested that the California Medical Association (CMA) be invited to participate in defining an acupuncturists' scope of practice. Goldblatt has made a big issue of the scope of practice the past two years, constantly suggesting the it should be  restricted, especially in the realm of diagnosis. Presumably, the purpose of her agenda is to limit the schools' obligation to teach competent practitioners, but the effect of her suggestions would be to exclude the public from direct access to the services of an acupuncturist, requiring a prior diagnosis and referral from a physician. Her suggestion that the CMA participate in determining the scope of practice would seem to confirm this; the CMA has a standing policy to limit the scope of practice of all other licensed health care professions to "ensure that care and treatment is provided under physician supervision," and "that the physician is the final decision-maker" in the provision of health care services to the public. After hiring a lobbying firm firm to help them oppose advancements by the profession in California, nothing coming from the Council of Colleges should be surprising.

450 CEs?
450 hours of CEs was added to the bill in leu of currently licensed acupuncturists going back to school when the 4000 hours kicks in, and giving due credit for years of experience. Some practitioners suggest removing this amendment, reducing it to 300 hours, or directing the Acupuncture Board to determine some formula for the appropriate number of additional hours, if any. All indications are that Assemblymember Judy Chu is considering these options. The amendment was an attempts to address an argument made by the Council of Colleges that current licensees should be required to return to school to make up for the additional 1,000 or so hours they were not required to complete under past standards. Since the Counicl of Colleges failed to state their support for this amendment, or even to comment on it, the charade of their proposal was exposed as a rather transparent attempt to fill their coffers with additional tuition. Unless there is any other objection, the 300 hour requirement can be removed in the Senate.

Even if some additional education is required, the Acupuncture Board allows up to 50% of the CE requirements to be done online, and professional associations have every opportunity to develop low-cost on-line CE courses to help everyone out, and make this requirement easier to achieve.

If you wish to let Judy Chu know what you think about AB1943, please use the link below to the Assembly web site. Her staff will get your email and put it in a register of supporters and opponents, and note the reasons for opposition. Don't expect individual responses, as that is very time-consuming, and many questions and comments are the same.

Assembly Website - Comment to Assemblymember Judy Chu on AB1943

Email Comments to CAOMA on AB1943