On July 3rd, the NY Times reported the following story.
Both houses of the Legislature had passed the bill by overwhelming margins after chiropractors and their patients had mounted one of the most vocal lobbying efforts of the year. They had contended that the state licenses chiropractors to perform certain therapeutic procedures, so chiropractors should be equal under the law to physicians.
The chiropractic groups had also maintained that the bill would not raise the cost of health insurance, saying the care they provide is cheaper and just as successful as that a patient can receive from orthopedists and other physicians.
But the governor wanted legislation that put a cap on how much insurance companies would have to pay for chiropractic treatment, administration officials said. The bill that the Legislature sent him had no such ceiling.
"First and foremost, this would drive up premiums," said Zenia Mucha, a spokeswoman for the governor. "The cost would fall most heavily on those who could least afford it: small businesses, local governments, new businesses."
Legislative leaders said they would not try to override the governor's veto.
Chiropractic groups said they hoped Pataki would reconsider.
"He does not appear to be an unreasonable man and he does understand that there is an injustice that is being done here," said Dr. William Remling, executive director of the New York Chiropractic Council, an industry group with 500 members.
Chiropractors have generally succeeded in getting such laws in other states. New York is one of only about 10 states that do not require health-insurance companies to pay for at least some chiropractic services, insurance-industry officials said.
The few legislators who voted against the bill said the chiropractors should have compromised by agreeing to some limits. The legislators said the governor would probably have signed a measure that made a less sweeping change in the state's health-care system.
"We warned them from the outset that this was a possibility, and they chose to ignore those warnings," said Assemblyman Alexander Grannis, a Democrat from New York City who is chairman of the Assembly Insurance Committee.
Copyright 1996 The New York Times
" Both houses of the Legislature had passed the bill by overwhelming margins after chiropractors and their patients had mounted one of the most vocal lobbying efforts of the year. They had contended that the state licenses chiropractors to perform certain therapeutic procedures, so chiropractors should be equal under the law to physicians. "
This statement is misleading. The purpose of the bill is not to give chiropractors the same status to physicians. Rather, the purpose is to insure that if a particular service or condition is reimburseable to a non-chiropractic provider under a patients insurance policy, then a chiropractor would also be reimbursed for providing said service. This under the provision that the item in question falls under the chiropractors scope of practice.