I appreciate the responses from my colleague from North Dakota, and I wish to briefly comment on this matter. As the sponsor in previous congresses of legislation that would require HCFA to defer to state law on this issue, I am pleased that HCFA has finally issued a proposed rule that would in fact defer to state law. This issue has been hanging over us for many years, and it seems that the only way to finally resolve it is for HCFA to publish its final rule based upon the proposed rule and let the states decide. As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I would add that we included a provision in our Medicare package in 1995 that would defer to state law on the issue of physician supervision of nurse anesthetists. That provision was not included in the final package as a result of an agreement between the two associations to focus on a reimbursement issue instead. However, I want to emphasize earlier comments that HCFA should neither be discouraged nor delayed in moving forward in publishing a final rule.
Kent Conrad: “I appreciate the responses from my colleague from North Dakota, and I wish to briefly comment on this matter. As the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing HCFA's proposed rule on deferring to state law regarding physician supervision of nurse anesthetists.
Share
More from Kent Conrad
I do, and I made that argument to the commission, and others on the commission made some of the points that you are making now.
I thought he was an outstanding Committee Chairman, and my former intern has succeeded him in his Congressional seat.
The surviving spouse provisions are especially important with regard to offsetting some of the unfairness that exists elsewhere.
Can I just respond quickly, Mr. Chairman, and say when Simpson-Bowles went down, a group of six of us in the Senate, three Democrats, three Republicans, were asked by leadership to see if we couldn't come up with a way forward to adopt the…





