January Newsletter Article
Government Relations Update December 2025 by Kenneth Certa MD
The government relations committee has been working on several issues
of interest to PaPS members; some familiar, some new. To see the text of
a bill, you can go to https://www.palegis.us/legislation/bills
followed by the bill number (either hb or sb.)
Psychology prescribing (HB 1000)
continues to be a major focus of our efforts. Thanks to the advocacy of
PaPS members, it appears that the committee chair will not be moving the
bill at this time; the votes aren’t there. We continue to work with the
members of the House Professional Licensure committee to educate them
about alternatives to increase access to care.
State senator Gene Yaw has been persuaded by some of his constituents
to introduce a bill mirroring HB~~~~1000 in the senate, though he has
not yet done so (he has put out a co-sponsorship memo.) His district
includes some of the most rural in PA (Bradford, Sullivan, Lycoming,
Tioga and Union counties) and he chairs the Center for Rural
Pennsylvania. The center held a public hearing in Harrisburg on April 8,
2025 entitled Advancing Rural Mental Health Access and Support. One of
the speakers presented the case for psychologist prescribing; here’s the
link https://www.rural.pa.gov/download.cfm?file=Resources/PDFs/news/Schurr%20Testimony-20250403.pdf.
Note that the bulk of the testimony centers on lack of access to care,
which of course includes psychological services without the expansion of
scope being sought. It is a tricky blurring of message, and the
statements about number of hours of supervised training seem impressive
until one counts the number of hours in psychiatry residency training
(more than 8 times as many hours.) We hope our members are in touch with
their state senators registering their opposition to co-sponsorship.
We are interested in member input intoHB 1519on
prior authorization, introduced by Rep Malagari. It
prohibits the use of prior auth in any insurance plan in PA. It sounds
great to many, but there is a potential hidden very real cost which we
must consider. Prescribers who are heavily influenced by novelty (or
pharma lobbying) may prescribe the latest product that comes on the
market without considering cost. Getting rid of prior auth is mighty
tempting; we’re interested in input.
We have partnered with the Pennsylvania Society for Addiction
Medicine to support regulation of kratom. It is banned
in many states, and many more are struggling with how best to regulate
its usage. There are bills in the senate (SB 0233) and
house (HB 2058) which take various approaches, short of
an outright ban: requiring over 21 to buy, placing on a schedule of
controlled substances, regulating not just kratom but also other
7-hydroxymitragynine products. Dr. Rob Tessier has been remarkably
active in this effort, as a member of both PaPS and PSAM, working with
the house and senate sponsors to get something crafted which will make a
difference, and can get past opposition to regulation.
Attempts to legalize recreational cannabis failed
this session, despite passing the house (HB 1200); it
was not considered by the senate. A measure which we have supported is
an effort to authorize the Department of Health to regulate
testing of cannabis products, sponsored by Rep Dan Frankel (who
had co-written HB 1200, as well as HB 1000; he chairs the house health
committee.) HB 33 is an effort to prevent current
cannabis providers from shopping around for testing companies which have
the lowest fail rate, and which could endanger the public with
adulterants and wildly varying degrees of potency.
Artificial intelligence and its potential for harm
to vulnerable individuals is much on the minds of many people. Efforts
to regulate the use of AI in the treatment of mental illness are
underway, with HB 2100 introduced to seriously restrict
the use of generative AI. We are reviewing the proposed definitions and
regulations to ensure that they will not unduly stifle research and use
of technology which may be of great help to our patients and
profession.
We continue to press on for funding startup costs for collaborative
care, as well as some way to protect the public from the ravages of
problem gambling. So far there has been little movement on changes to
the Mental Health Procedures Act, except for notice of
proposed rulemaking published December 6 in the Pennsylvania Bulletin
(55 Pa.B. 8235). This will amend the 5100 regulations
under the act, to bring it in better alignment with Act 32 of 2022 and
HIPAA. Our review has not identified concerns.
If there are other issues of concern to members we welcome input into
how PaPS can be more effective in the role of government in the practice
of psychiatry.