Bill Description: House Bill 400 would clarify that patients can choose to use their own or a designated donor's blood for a transfusion under most circumstances.
Rating: 0
Does it violate the spirit or the letter of either the United States Constitution or the Idaho Constitution? Examples include restrictions on speech, public assembly, the press, privacy, private property, or firearms. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution or the Idaho Constitution?
House Bill 400 would create Section 39-3704, Idaho Code, to clarify that, with certain exceptions, "a health care provider or facility may not prohibit a patient from providing, through a blood establishment complying with all federal requirements for the collection of blood products, the patient's own blood or the blood product of the patient's directed donor for any potential transfusion related to such patient's health care."
Exceptions would apply if "the donation or transfusion of the blood product would be detrimental to the donor or patient; "insufficient time exists to coordinate and arrange for the patient's provision of the blood product prior to a surgery or medical procedure"; or "a surgery or medical procedure is for emergency medical services."
A health care provider or facility would be "immune from liability for injury, damages, or death occurring as a result of using the blood product provided by a patient" unless the provider or facility is guilty of gross negligence.
(+1)
Does it violate the principles of federalism by increasing federal authority, yielding to federal blandishments, or incorporating changeable federal laws into Idaho statutes or rules? Examples include citing federal code without noting as it is written on a certain date, using state resources to enforce federal law, and refusing to support and uphold the tenth amendment. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the principles of federalism?
The bill's reference to "complying with all federal requirements for the collection of blood products" is troubling. It is always problematic when Idaho code requires compliance with federal law and especially so when the reference is broad or generic. "All federal requirements" could include any number of directives that run counter to Idaho public policy.
Incorporating federal law by reference subordinates state law to changeable federal statutes, which means that the federal government can effectively change state law without the Legislature's knowledge or consent.
(-1)
