Bill Description: House Bill 945 would create a new regulatory structure and licensing framework for medical professionals who use AI to assist in providing health care to patients.
Rating: -6
Does it create, expand, or enlarge any agency, board, program, function, or activity of government? Conversely, does it eliminate or curtail the size or scope of government?
House Bill 945 would create Chapter 60, Title 54, Idaho Code, the “AI Medical Services Act.” This chapter would create a new Board of Autonomous Medical Practice comprised of 11 gubernatorial appointees, including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, an ethicist, public members, and AI experts. The board would have staff, rulemaking authority, an institutional review board function, audit powers, complaint investigations, and enforcement powers. The bill would establish an entirely new licensure program, regulatory sandbox, fee-setting process, and clinical practice oversight for AI medical services.
(-1)
Does it give government any new, additional, or expanded power to prohibit, restrict, or regulate activities in the free market? Conversely, does it eliminate or reduce government intervention in the market?
The bill would give the board it creates extensive regulatory authority including to license artificial intelligence augmented and autonomous service providers (AAASPs); set scope-of-practice rules, clinical practice agreements, and modifiers for autonomy level; require disclosures, immutable algorithm snapshots, audits, and adverse-event reporting; prohibit unlicensed practice, false advertising of licensure, and certain steering/marketing practices; impose fines, suspensions, revocations, cease-and-desist orders, and injunctive relief; and operate a regulatory sandbox with a variety of restrictions based on geography, volume, and scope.
(-1)
Does it increase barriers to entry into the market? Examples include occupational licensure, the minimum wage, and restrictions on home businesses. Conversely, does it remove barriers to entry into the market?
The bill would impose occupational-style licensure with a provisional sandbox phase, in addition to requiring fees, a $50,000+ surety bond, liability insurance, background checks, wind-down plans, medical director requirements for higher-autonomy classes, and review by the “state centralized institutional review board”.
Certain AI clinical services (especially critical, time-sensitive, or fully autonomous) would newly require state approval before market entry.
(-1)
Does it directly or indirectly create or increase any taxes, fees, or other assessments? Conversely, does it eliminate or reduce any taxes, fees, or other assessments?
The bill would authorize the newly-created board to adopt and charge “reasonable fees for applications, provisional licenses, license renewals, and other administrative services.”
(-1)
Does it increase government spending (for objectionable purposes) or debt? Conversely, does it decrease government spending or debt?
The bill says, “The legislature may appropriate funds as necessary for the initial establishment and operation of the board.”
Such appropriations would end once “fee revenue generated under this section is sufficient to support the ongoing administrative costs of the board.”
(-1)
Does it directly or indirectly create or increase penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes? Conversely, does it eliminate or decrease penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes?
The bill would impose significant penalties, including reprimand, probation, restricted licensure, suspension, revocation, and administrative fines of up to $10,000 per violation, including unlicensed practice, false representation, or aiding unlicensed AI medical services.
(-1)
