House bill would strip power of small business licensing boards
House Bill 952, assigned to the Small Business Development Committee, stands to strip rulemaking power of state licensing boards and harm business professionals around the state should it makes its way through the General Assembly this session.
Sponsored by the Governor’s Floor Leaders, Representatives Chad Nimmer, Christian Coomer, Robert Dickey, Terry Rogers, and Amy Carter, the ‘Georgia Professional Regulation Reform Act‘ is particularly troublesome because it would allow the Governor to veto any rule proposed by the licensing boards if the rule is one that will be submitted to and recognized by the Secretary of State. Essentially, the Governor would have oversight over significant decision making and operational processes of these state licensing boards. The bill dictates that the Governor will “actively supervise” professional licensing boards and “review and, in writing, approve or veto any rule before it is filed in the office of the Secretary of State.”
The problem with this legislation is four-fold:
- It’s obvious, because of who sponsored the legislation, that this bill is “an idea” or a desire of the Governor. While Republicans may be of the belief that Governor Deal would not ever betray The People with an executive overreach, consideration needs to be given that Georgia will not always be governed by the red powers that currently preside. Down the road, decisions like these could lead to substantial regret.
- The Governor, like most people, is not an all-knowing messiah. There is no way he can possibly be well-versed on the issues facing any of these licensing boards, and therefore, is not the most educated person to making decisions on whether or not something is good for the industry.
- HB 952 grants the executive branch an enormous amount of power into an aspect of government that affects numerous professionals across the state. Worse, the language dictates that the power lies with the Governor “or his designee.”
- Even worse, the bill explicitly permits the use of executive orders to carry out the desires of HB 952.
Think about all of the professionals across the state that could be subjected to direct oversight by the Governor:
- Architects & Interior Designers
- Athlete Agents
- Athletic & Entertainment Commission
- Athletic Trainers
- Auctioneers
- Cemeteries
- Chiropractors
- Condition Air Contractors
- Cosmetologists & Barbers
- Dietitians
- Dispensing Opticians
- Electrical Contractors
- Engineers & Land Surveyors
- Foresters
- Funeral Directors & Embalmers
- Geologists
- Hearing Aid Dealers & Dispensers
- Immigration Assistance
- Landscape Architects
- Librarians
- Low Voltage Contractors
- Massage Therapists
- Music Therapists
- Nurses
- Nursing Home Administrators
- Occupational Therapists
- Optometry
- Physical Therapists
- Plumbers
- Podiatrists
- Private Detectives & Security Agencies
- Professional Counselors & Social Workers
- Psychologists
- Residential & General Contractors
- Speech Pathologists & Audiologists
- Used Motor Vehicle Dealers
- Utility Contractors
- Veterinarians
- Water & Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators
The bill was heard before committee on Thursday, but because of the substantial dissent, no vote was taken. The concern now lies with whether or not the bill will be inserted elsewhere or crammed through closer to Crossover Day.
About Author
Jessica Szilagyi
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What problem is this intended to solve?
In February of last year, SCOTUS ruled in NC vs FTC that an elected official must have the final say over appointed licensing board decisions in order for them to be actions of the state. This bill is designed to get Georgia’s licensing boards back into proper legal standing after the SCOTUS ruling.
In the NC case, the board members were elected by their peers and had the power to create a unti-trust and effect their market place. The Georgia boards that cover my profession and additional creditals are each Governor appointed boards. If a governor controls who is on the board, would that not already be government oversight?
It should be noted that the only board except by the bill is the state bar.
You’re right about the ruling, but my concern is that the ruling said an elected official. We don’t have to make that elected official the Governor (or a designee of the Governor) for this.
By the time the law would take effect the Governor will have 2 years remaining. The law will be evergreen. So it’s a lot less about the person than the position, and ultimately the Governor is the one that is accountable to the largest number of voters.
But if not the Governor, who do you suggest should have this power?
I agree that it is about the position, not the person, which is why my concern is that we’re putting it with the Governor when we won’t always be a red state.
I don’t understand why it couldn’t be the Secretary of State (or his/her designee as allowed by this bill) or a joint House-Senate Committee devised of people of equal partisanship. My personal belief is that it hands too much power to the executive branch, and I believe that regardless of who has control of the executive branch.
The bill didn’t move in committee today because there is concern from both sides of the aisle that this might not be the best place to put this power.
But by appointing the board, doesn’t the governor already meet the over site requirements to prevent an unti trust as noted in the SCOTUS ruling?
Ellynn,
My understanding of the ruling is that that board is appointed and the new ruling dictates “elected.”
In The NC case, if I am looking at the legal babble correctly, the court found that the state did not supervised the licensing board. The board (dentists) had members elected by their professional associations to serve on the board with little to no State involvement. Based solely on the Georgia boards that effect my career, the profession does not pick the board, the Governor does. Any rule change or legal issue they are involved in are handed over to the AG office for review to ment state codes already.
Which leads me to ask, do we really need this bill to begin with if the governor already has involvement and the AG has some ‘supervision”?
And I’m also of the understanding that a representative of the Attorney General attends many of these meetings, so that could be the “designee” if it went to the AG if the concern – and would also address legality of “rules” that are subject to veto.
Jessica, under your reason #2 above, you may want to consult a dictionary and reconsider your use of the word ‘pariah’ in reference to the governor. Unless, of course, you really think he is a pariah.
You’re right. I meant messiah. Thanks.
De nada.
Are these licensing boards a paid gig? That would be shweet- a salary with no actual responsibility!
It’s good to be da King.
“The professional licensing boards division provides administrative and investigative support for thirty-four occupational and professional regulatory boards in sixty-four trades and professions, regulating more than 700,000 active and inactive licensees to provide consumer protection”
Slight thread jack here but why does sos regulate so many folks and professions? Several such as some medical and real estate self-regulate but I don’t understand why sos regulates so many other professions.
Even if an associate regulates it’s profession, like doctors, dentist, engineers, nurses etc… That does not mean that every one who practices in that profession belongs to the associate. or could belong to more then one association for that profession. I personal belong to 4 professional associates which have professional licensing requirements in this state. I carry only 1 license out of the 4. I have another license, but I am not a member of their related association. Just because you have a MD behind your name doesn’t mean have to be a member of the AMA. You could be a member of the APCP or ABMS. Some of the State board cover multi professions. Example, Engineers and Land Surveyors cover about a handful of separate licensing types and have 3 major professional boards, plus some minor ones, connected to those professions. Architects and Interior Designers have two very distinct governing bodies, and two very different set of requirements of what they can and can not do once licensed but share a state board.
More importantly, a Board can take away your right to practice in that state. An association, having no government oversight, can not take away any of your education or experience base credentials.
Furthermore, if a professional association is allowed to fully function with no government oversight, they could violate antitrust rules for including who can practice in the profession and even how much they can charge, thus corning the market place or manipulation prices.
In the long run it can also used for enforcement. If you hire a person as a nurse for your elderly relative, and something goes wrong. a licensed nurse has some form of professional insurance. You can, at the very least, sue them or have their license revoked. If they had no license to begin with- you can now start with felony charges. In Georgia, a license also ensures you are a legal resident of the country who has had a criminal background check. I can tell you not one of the association I am a member with has ever done so.
Sos licensing is no guarantee of competence. If I hire a professional I do my own research to ensure he belongs and/or is licensed by the various professional organizations and that he has a reputation for competence. There is enough available info that any consumer can do his own research if he desires. Sos oversight just adds an unnecessary layer of government.
The S of S is not doing any oversight of the licenses. The Governor appointed professional boards are doing the oversight and ruling on licensing. The S of S is confirming citizenship, checking documentation of education and testing, and holding the records. They are issuing out the license at the approval of the professional licensing board.
Again, professional organizations do not hand out licenses. They certify, accredit, test, set standards, oversee college degree requirements and keep track of continuing education hours for their profession. They can tell you if they are a member in good standing, which in most cases they have paid their dues, and have not lost a license in another state issued out by a different S of S office over saw by that licensing board. No association is going to tell you what member is better qualified over another.
Your short answer is that some professions have too small of a number to have their own line item in the budget, do not have powerful lobbyist, or are not doctors, dentist or lawyers or involved in insurance.
My answer is I will do my own research on the individual or if the individual is employed by a company, I will check the company also. And who the heck cares if their barber is “unlicensed.”
So if passed we will have boards more worried about what the Governor says than regulating the profession. I am against it.
Not to mention the time. If this passes, the governor or his rep has to personally sign off on every decision, including new, transferred and renewed licensing. That’s almost a 200,000 a year. Say you’re a spouse of a military member transferred to this state. It already takes 2 to 5 months to have a license transfer, depending on type and timing of board meetings. Now add a governor’s approval to that time.
The thing that scares me is overruling a board’s revocation. If a medical field professional is stripped of it license by it’s governing board, under this rule, the governor can overrule the board. What does the current governor know about practicing in the medical field? In theory, Doctor so and so could have his best friend do a favor for the governor best friend’s third cousin and puff, he has a Georgia license again.