Legislative Updates displays bills pending in the 2015-2016 state legislative sessions.   To view bills from the 2013-2014 sessions and their results, see Legislative Archive.  We expect many new bills will be introduced during the next few months.  Please check back weekly.

Bills are listed by state and subject, with a brief explanation of what's in the bill. Unless indicated otherwise, we believe the listed bills should not pass. Unfortunately, most CAM bills filed in the state legislatures are pro-CAM.  Bills added to the list this week, or with updated information, are marked NEW! 

To voice your opinion on these bills (and we hope you will) you need to find out where they are in the legislative process and how to contact state legislators in the states where they are pending. See FAQS for more information on how to do this. Each year there are many bills forcing public and private health insurance providers to cover CAM services (especially chiropractic). Because of the sheer volume of these bills we are unable to include them in our legislative updates at this time.


For more information on naturopathy and why naturopaths should not be licensed see the Oppose Naturopathic Licensing! website.

COLORADO: House Bill 1075. Passed House, to Senate. Committees considering this bill kept adding addtional limitations on naturopathic practice as it moved through the House.  Colorado passed a naturopathic registration (but not licensing) act for naturopaths in 2013.  The bill contained provisions protecting children by placing restrictions on naturopathic treatment of pediatric "clients" including a complete ban on their seeing patients under 2 years of age. (Those who see naturopaths are not referred to as "patients" in the naturopathic registration law, but are called "clients.") They tried to get rid of these restrictions last year, but failed. This year, they are attempting a more modest amendment than in 2014. Instead of completly lifting the pediatric practice restrictions, they are asking the legislature to allow them to see clients younger than 2, but with the same restrictions that apply to clients between 2 and 8: providing the parent with the recommended vaccination schedule, 3 hours of yearly contining education in pediatrics, informing the parent that the naturopath is not a licensed physician, recommending that the child have a relationship with a licensed health care provider and referring a child to such a provider for a wellness evaluation if the child has no such relationship. Bill amended in committee to add additional hours of training, including recognizing a sick infant and when to refer an infant for more intensive care and, in its latest version, requiring a collaberative agreement with a licensed pediatrician or family practice physician to "ensure safety" of clients under 2. Naturopathic registration law will undergo "sunset review" and could be repealed in its entirety on September 1, 2017.  The state must collect data from naturopaths who see clients under 2, including adverse reactions to naturopathic treatments. 

CONNECTICUT: House Bill 6797. Last year Connecticut "modernized" the naturopathic scope of practice by substantially expanding it. Naturopaths failed to get prescription privileges but are trying again this year. No bill allowing them to prescribe has been introduced, but this bill directs the Department of Health, in consultation with the state Board of Natuorpathic Examiners, to submit a report to the legislature, by February, 2016, on the naturopathic scope of practice, including prescribing privileges. 

HAWAII: Senate Bill 1216.  This bill allows naturopaths to corner the market in colon hydrotherapy by specifically excluding others, except licensed physicians and nurse practitioners (who wouldn't use it on patients for "detoxification" anyway) from performing it.  The rationale is colon hydrotherapy can be dangerous when performed by untrained persons.  That is true, but allowing only trained persons to use it doesn't address a more basic issue with colonic hydrotherapy: it is based on the pseudoscientific notion that our bodies are full of "toxins" that can be eliminated via this method, thereby releiving us of all sorts of maladies. It is a waste of money. Also, it can be dangerous even when performed properly because it can deplete the body of electrolytes.   

IDAHO:  House Bill 181. This bill appears to be a new iteration of naturopathic licensing bills with a new and even broader scope of practice. Gone is the language defining naturopathy in terms of the "body's self-healing ability," i.e., vitalism.  Defines "naturopathic medicine" as "a distinct and comprehensive system of primary health care practiced by naturopathic physicians" and "natural health care services" as a "broad domain" including "diagnosis and treatment," but leaves the content of naturopathic practice largely up to a Board of Naturopathic "Physicians" using the vague standard that the practices permitted by the new law must be "consistent with naturopathic education and training." Could perform minor office procedures, prescribe prescription drugs and medical devices as determined by a fomulary approved by the Board. The Board can approve "specialties," which are not defined in the bill but which presumably would include such things as "naturopathic oncology" and "naturopathic childbirth attendance."  "Gross negligence [but apparently not regular negligence], incompetence or misconduct" is prohibited, but not falling below a standard of care. No malpractice insurance is requried. Naturopaths cannot be disciplined solely for using "unconventional"  practices unless a patient is actually harmed and the patient has signed a waiver acknowledging the practice is "unconventional."  Conviction of a crime is grounds for discipline but naturopath can request an "exemption review" so that his conviction doesn't count against him, if the Board establishes a rule allowing such reviews. 

ILLINOIS: Senate Bill 1601.  Naturopathic licensing bill. Like last year's unsuccessful bills, this bill would license naturopathic "physicians" but is vague on details.  Would be regulated by the state medical licensing board and state medical disciplinary board, each of which would have one naturopath member. No scope of practice defined, but they would be able to perform a number of tasks that medical doctors now perform, such as certify sick leave for certain state employees.

IOWA: Senate Study Bill 1067; House Study Bill 51. Naturopathic licensing bills. These bills are identical and have the same provisions as study bills that failed to pass last year.  In Iowa, study bills are used to determine reception to an issue by the General Assembly and are developed under the auspices of a legislative committee. If a study bill is approved by the committee it can then be considered by the General Assembly. These study bills would give NDs an extremely broad scope of practice comparable to an MD or DO PCP and they could call themselves "physicians." NDs could diagnose and treat any patient with any disease or condition, order lab tests and diagnostic imaging, and prescribe drugs unless the drug is excluded by the naturopathic exclusionary formulary. They could administer drugs by numerous methods, including IV. NDs would be governed by the Medical Board acting on the advice of a naturopathic advisory committee, consisting of 4 NDs, one MD or DO, one pharmacist and one public member, giving the NDs an automatic majority.  This advisory committee would recommend which prescription drugs would be excluded from naturopathic practice. In other words, drugs are presumed included unless excluded. No malpractice insurance is required.

MASSACHUSETTS: House Docket 846, Senate Docket 166. Both of these would permit naturopathic registration; registration in Massachusetts is the same thing as licensing in other states. These are not yet formally bills, so no information is available on their content. 

MISSISSIPPI: House Bill 725. Failed. Died in committeee.  Naturopathic licensing bill. Would give naturopaths, who would be allowed to call themselves "physicians," a scope of practice almost as broad as an MD or DO primary care physician. They would be  regulated by their own board, the Board of Naturopathic Medicine. They could prescribe drugs, if these drugs are on the naturopathic formulary approved by a formulary council consisting of 2 two naturopaths, two pharmacists and one MD or DO. The approved prescription drugs could be by all the usual routes, including IV. Naturopaths could practice "naturopathic childbirth attendance" as well, with some additional training and passing an approved exam.  One of these exams is that of the North American Registry of Midwives,  an organization of"direct-entry midwives," that is, midwives who have no formal medical training. All the usual naturopathic nostrums would be included in their practice act: dietary supplements, homeopathy, enzymes, vitamins, minerals, colonic hydrotherapy. They would be allowed to use a wide range of diagnostic procedures, including ordering and performing phlebotomy, clinical lab tests, orificial exams, and physiological function tests and ordering diagnostic imagining. These would presumably include such things as PET scans, MRIs, x-rays, spirometry and cardiac function testing. 

MONTANA: Senate Bill 133. Postponed indefinately. Currently, naturopaths have a limited formulary that includes some prescription drugs. This bill would allow naturopaths to prescribe all prescription drugs, thereby giving the same prescriptive authority at medical doctors. 

NEW JERSEY: Assembly Bill 814, Senate Bill 1190. Naturopathic licensing bill. Bill defines naturopathic doctors as practitioners of primary health care and gives them the authority to independently diagnose and treat any patient with any condition, injury or disease. Naturopaths could order diagnostic tests, including x-rays; use typical naturopathic remedies such as homeopathy, dietary supplements, colonic irrigation, and "neutriceuticals;" and prescribe durable medical equipment. They would be self-governed by a naturopathic board.  Establishes an advisory committee to look into "naturopathic childbirth attendance." 

NORTH DAKOTA: NEW! Senate Bill 2194. Passed Senate on reconsideration, to House. Expands naturopathic scope of practice to include prescription drugs if on a formulary established by a subcommittee of the Board of Integrative Medicine consisting of an MD or DO, naturopath, pharmacist and APRN. Formulary cannot include Schedule I-IV controlled substances except anabolic steroids. Naturopaths can currently prescribe homeopathic remedies, minerals, vitamins, enzymes, dietary supplements and "botanical medicines."  If on the formulary, this will mean they will be able to adminster these substances by injection, including IV. Bill would also allow naturopaths to perform "minor office procedures," but not skin biopsies.  Permits naturopaths to perform "naturopathic childbirth attendance" after completing a 3-year certified professional midwifey curriculum approved by Board and passing a standardized Board-endorsed exam, such as that of the North American Registry of Midwives, the certifying agency for direct-entry midwives.  Direct-entry midwives do not need any prior medical education, such as a nursing degree, to be certified. 

PENNSYLVANIA: House Bill 516. Naturopathic licensing bill. Rep. Mustio announced that he will reintroduce his licensing bill from the 2013-2014 session, which passed in the House but not the Senate. The actual text of the new bill is not yet available. 

RHODE ISLAND: Senate Bills 94, 331, House Bill 5501. Naturopathic licensing bills. These bills are similar to a licensing bill that failed to pass last year. Gives naturopaths a broad scope of practice similar to MD/DO primary care physicians. Could diagnose any patient of any age with any disease or condition using all diagnostic methods "commonly used" by medical PCPs, a term that is undefined. Presumably, this would include the ability to order and interpret the reports of, for example, EKGs, MRIs, CT scans, PET scans, EEGs. Defines naturopathy as the practice of supporting and stimulating the body's self-healing ability, i.e., vitalism. Permits prescription of "natural medicines" and defines "natural" as "present in, produced by, or derived from nature," which could mean practically any substance.  Permits use of homeopathy. NDs would be overseen by Department of Health with two naturopaths as its sole advisors.

WASHINGTON: Senate Bill 5815. Expands prescriptive authority of naturopathsAuthorizes a naturopath to prescribe and administer legend drugs; hydrocodone products contained in Schedule II of the uniform controlled substances act; and controlled substances contained in Schedules III through V of the uniform controlled substances act.


ARIZONA: House Bill 2215. Establishes certification for chiropractors to practice "animal chiropractic."  For veterinarians, establishes a "specialist certification" in animal chirorpactic.  Applicants must complete a "postgraduate course" in animal chiropractic and pass an exam.  These "postgraduate courses" are weekend programs at small animal chiropractic trade-type schools not affiliated with any accredited institution of higher education except one at Parker University, a straight chiropractic college.

ARIZONA: Senate Bill 1040.  Permits chiropractors "certified in pharmacology" to prescribe prescription-strength doses of ibuprofen, naproxen, methocarbomol and cyclobenzaphrine.  Certification requires an unspecified number of hours studying pharmacology at a chiropractic college and "postgraduate study," which appears to be a sort of self-study with an instructor from a chiropractic, medical or osteopathic school.  It also requires a "rotation" of an unspecified number of hours under the supervision of an MD or DO, and passing an exam approved by the state chiropractic board. 

HAWAII: House Bill 997. Expands chiropractic scope of practice and allows chiropractors to call themselves "physicians." Currently, chiropractors are limited to "adjustments" of the spine with limited permission to treat certain extra-spinal neuromusculoskeletal conditions. This bill would elimiate those restrictions and allow chiropractors to diagnose and treat any disease or abnormality (except for use of legend drugs and surgery), the only limitation being that diagnostic methods and treatments be taught by an accredited chiropractic college. They could also employ "clinical nutritional methods," which would give them the authority to perform bogus "nutritional" testing and sell dietary supplements to patients. They could use or order diagnostic and laboratory testing as well as  any other method of diagnostic examination as long as the latter are taught by chiropractic colleges and approved by the state chiropractic board. This is another of several recent attempts in the state legislatures  to default to the chiropractic colleges to determine a chiropractor's scope of practice

MISSISSIPPI: House Bill 729. Failed. Died in committee. Chiropractic is defined under current law as the analysis of "nerve interferences" and manipulation/adjustment to "restore and maintain health."  This is straight "subluxation" based chiropractic.  Chiropractors are permitted to use x-rays in their practices.  This bill would allow them to use any "radiologic technologies" necessary for their services.  Thus, the bill would allow the use of PET scans, CT scans, MRIs and other forms of radiation-emitting technologies to detect the non-existent chiropractic "subluxation," thereby exposing patients to radiation for no good reason. 

NEBRASKA: Legislative Bill 211. Under current law, school children must have a physical exam and eye exam at certain ages performed by a physician, physician's assistant or APRN. An optometrist can also perform the the eye exam. This bill would also allow chiropractors to perform physical and eye exams

NEW MEXICO: NEW! Senate Bill 376. Public Affairs Committee voted "do pass" as amended.  This is another effort in a continuing attempt to refashion chiropractors into primary care physicians.  The practice of chiropractic is renamed "chiropractic medicine." Would considerably expand the already liberal scope of practice for chiropractors in New Mexico. DCs would be allowed to diagnose and treat any condition for which they have been "educated and trained," essentially defaulting to the chiropractor the authority to make the decision regarding what he can and cannot do. The state's existing "advanced practice" chiropractors are divided into two tiers, "Level One" and "Level Two."  Both could administer certain substances, such as "nutritional medicine," bioidentical hormones, and glandulars, by injection. Both could prescribe any drugs approved by the chiropractic board. Level Ones currently have 90 additional hours of training after chiropractic school, and they would be grandfathered in, but requirements are changed to a "postgraduate degree in a clinical specialty" from a chiropractic school, with no minimum standards for such a course set.  "Advance practice" chiropractors can already prescribe such drugs as bioidentical hormones and live cell products. This bill would allow them to inject those and other substances. If the chiropractic board, in consultation with (but not necessarily the approval of) the pharmacy board, gives its ok, other drugs could be added.  Level Twos must have, in addition, 650 hours in a supervised "clinical rotation," which could take place at a chiropractic college. Level Twos prescribe, inject and dispense all dangerous drugs (as defined in by state law) except Schedule I and II controlled substances,that are used in standard primary care practice. Bill amendments require that instruction for Level Two be ok'd by state medical board and collaberation agreement with physician or certified nurse practitioner for first 5 years of practice for Level Two chiropractors who want to prescribe dangerous drugs, including chart review.

VIRGINIA: Senate Bill 1244. Expands chiropractic scope of practice to include physical exams for commericial driver's licenses or instructors for such licenses. 

WYOMING: Senate Bills 61 and 79. Failed legislative deadline; unlikely to be considered in this session. Permits chiropractors to use the term "chiropractic physician."

Acupuncture, Traditional Chinese Medicine and Oriental Medicine

IOWA: House Study Bill 101. Substantially expands acupuncturist's scope of practice to include "oriental medicine," which includes moxibustion, cupping, reflexology, magnets, herbal medicine, dietary supplements, mind-body techniques and stimulation by a device that doesn't pierce the skin. Defaults to the acupuncture accrediting organizations to determine what other clinical practices can be added. In addition, acupuncturists would be allowed to "promote, maintain, and restore health, improve bodily function and prevent disease."  Existing requirement that patients be notified that the acupuncturist's services must not be regarded as diagnosis, treatment, opinion or advice from a physician is eliminated. 

MISSISSIPPI: Senate Bill 2319; House Bill 898. Failed. Died in committee. Acupuncturists are again trying to repeal a requirement that a physician examine a patient and give the patient a referral to an acupuncturist before the acupuncturist can treat the patient. Similar bills were defeated last year. 

NEW YORK: Assembly Bill 2558, Senate Bill 3911. Expands acupuncture scope of practice to include recommendation of diet, herbs and "natural products." These include custom-made remedies and herbal products, but only with passage of "herbal competency exam." Adds continuing education requirements for acupuncturists and makes changes to their regulatory board, one of which is to include 3 physicians who practice acupuncture.

NORTH DAKOTA: NEW! Senate Bill 2191. Passed Senate, to House. Acupuncture licensing act. Defines scope of practice fairly narrowly as including botanical medicine and needle acupuncture, but without "electronic stimulation." Provides that hospitals may employ naturopaths. Would be regulated by State Board of Integrative Health Care. 

OKLAHOMA: Senate Bill 489.  Acupuncture licensing act giving acupuncturists an extremely broad scope of practice. Acupuncture is defined as a form of "primary heatlh care" that "employs acupuncture diagosis and treatment" and "adjunctive therapies and diagnostic techniques" for "promotion, maintenance and restoration of health and the prevention of disease." There is absolutely no evidence that acupuncture does any of these things. They may, among other methods, employ needle acupuncture and moxibustion, prescribe herbs, and give dietary advice.    Puts acupuncturists under the jurisdiciton of the State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision, but the Board's authority to enact regulations is limited to subjects like continuing education and certain other matters regarding licensing.  Advisory Committee consisting of acupuncturists and public members advises Board. No malpractice insurance required. 

RHODE ISLAND: House Bill 5381, Senate Bill 234. Adds the practice of "Oriental medicine" to acupuncture practice act. Defined very broadly as a form of "primary health care" using Chinese medical and acupuncture diagnostics, including those based on "newer scientific models" for "assessment, treatment, preventaion and cure of any disease." May use acupuncture, moxibustion, gwa/sha, thermography, herbs, homeopathy and "supplement therapy." 

WYOMING: House Bill 246. Failed legislative deadline; unlikely to be considered in this session. Acupuncture and oriental medicine licensing bill. Defines acupuncture and oriental medicine broadly as a "form of primary health care" based on oriental medicine concepts for diagnosis and treatment of disease and health promotion. Could "stimulate points on the body" with lancets, needles, magnets, electricity and suction, among other methods.  Could prescribe and sell, among others, herbal remedies to patients, as well as homeopathic treatments, glandulars and dietary supplements. Would be regulated by a board consisting of 4 acupuncturists and one public member. 

Other CAM Practitioners

No pending bills.

Other Bills of Interest

WASHINGTON: House Bill 1476, Senate Bill 5408.  Under current law, failure to provide medical care to a child or dependent person can constitute criminal mistreatment and can be punished as a misdemeanor or felony.  However, the statute provides an exemption: Christian Science treatment by a Christian Science practiitoner in lieu of medical care is not considered deprivation of medically necessary health care. A civil statute governing protection of childen from abuse and neglect states that Christian Science treatment in lieu of medical care is not by itslef neglect. The bills would repeal both the criminal and civil provisions.