The Assembly Committee on Ways and Means convened on May 30, 2025, to discuss Senate Bill 378, a significant piece of legislation aimed at reforming the regulation of freestanding emergency departments (FSEDs) in Nevada. The bill proposes several key changes, including ensuring patients can access their electronic medical records within seven business days at no cost, regulating independent emergency centers to prevent surprise billing, and banning noncompete clauses for clinicians primarily involved in patient care.

One of the most notable provisions of the bill is the establishment of new transparency reporting and licensing requirements for emergency care centers. This aims to address concerns about the proliferation of FSEDs, particularly in areas where they may be misleading patients regarding the level of care provided. The bill also includes measures to allow Nevada Medicaid to investigate claims of fraud proactively and to ensure that the state is not overbilled for nonemergency visits to these centers.

During the meeting, committee members raised concerns about the implications of the bill, particularly regarding the accessibility of urgent care services in Nevada. Some members emphasized the need for more urgent care facilities, especially in underserved areas, arguing that simply regulating FSEDs without addressing the broader issue of access to care could exacerbate existing healthcare challenges.

The fiscal implications of the bill were also discussed, with estimates indicating that the implementation would incur costs for Nevada Medicaid, including hiring staff to oversee the new regulations. However, proponents of the bill argued that the long-term savings from reducing fraud and overbilling would outweigh these initial costs.

Opposition to the bill came from various stakeholders, including representatives from the Nevada Hospital Association and other healthcare organizations, who argued that the proposed regulations could limit access to emergency care and impose unnecessary burdens on healthcare providers. They expressed concerns that the bill might disrupt the integrated care model currently in place, which allows for seamless patient transfers between FSEDs and hospitals.

In conclusion, Senate Bill 378 represents a significant effort to reform emergency care in Nevada, aiming to enhance transparency and protect consumers from unexpected costs. However, the discussions highlighted the ongoing debate about balancing regulation with the need for accessible healthcare services, particularly in rapidly growing areas of the state. The committee's next steps will involve further deliberation on the bill and its potential amendments to address the concerns raised during the hearing.