The Michigan House Rules Committee heard bipartisan testimony on legislation to permit and regulate veterinary telehealth, restoring flexibility used during the COVID‑19 pandemic and setting new guardrails for remote veterinary care.

Representative Pelhoske, sponsor, said the bill is a companion to Representative Aragona's HB 4,220 and would require the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) to promulgate rules to allow veterinary telehealth. "Veterinary telehealth was allowed during the pandemic, but those emergency rules expired and that flexibility ceased," Pelhoske said, adding the bills are intended to expand access for pet owners who cannot make in‑person visits because of cost, transportation, disability or shelter resource constraints.

Dr. Crystal Sapp, vice president of veterinary medicine at Michigan Humane, testified in support and described using telehealth in Michigan Humane clinics as a "vital tool" to meet clients where they are and prevent relinquishment of pets. "The ability to use telehealth as a first step in educating clients, assessing an animal's needs, and developing a plan of care could be an invaluable tool in safely providing much needed veterinary services in an accessible and affordable way," Dr. Sapp said.

Caitlin Stadler, legislative director for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) Great Lakes Region, said the bills would allow Michigan‑licensed veterinarians to establish veterinarian‑client‑patient relationships through telehealth, similar to human medicine. Stadler noted the state faces veterinarian shortages and said telehealth "can help bridge gaps" created by workforce and access shortages.

Testifiers and sponsors emphasized several limits the bills would impose: veterinarians must be licensed in Michigan; telehealth would not permit prescribing controlled substances without an in‑person exam; and the legislation would limit the duration of prescriptions issued via telehealth to up to 14 days with one single refill if clinically appropriate. The sponsors said the rules will still require clear identification of the veterinarian, client consent documentation and privacy protections consistent with applicable law.

Committee members asked about consultations with the department and the Michigan Board of Veterinary Medicine; sponsors said both had been consulted and the department had raised only timing concerns about rulemaking.

Multiple organizations submitted written support, including the Animal Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Alliance, the Humane Society of Huron Valley, Michigan Pet Alliance and others.

No roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript excerpts; the item was taken for testimony and committee discussion.