Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Patients lose when states block independent doctors

Jaimie Cavanaugh, JD and Daryl James
Policy
February 11, 2023
Share
Tweet
Share

Patients win when independent doctors open shop. More choice means improved service and lower costs for everyone. Yet states often intervene to shut down health care competition.

Virginia regulators blocked Maryland-based radiologist Mark Monteferrante when he tried to expand his independent practice across state lines. Alabama regulators stopped family physician Nancy White when she tried to offer residential drug treatment at a 16-bed facility. And Iowa regulators stalled ophthalmologist Lee Birchansky for 20 years when he tried to open an outpatient surgery center next to his office.

None of the government interference involved concerns about health or safety. Licensed doctors would have provided medical care using state-of-the-art equipment and techniques in all three cases. Regulators objected instead to doctors working for themselves in a system that tilts increasingly toward multibillion-dollar conglomerates.

Consolidation of independent practices has continued for decades, hitting a milestone in 2018 when employed physicians outnumbered self-employed physicians for the first time in U.S. history. Many factors contribute to the trend, which accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Regulatory compliance and medical billing, for example, have grown increasingly complex. But the hinderance for Monteferrante, White and Birchansky was something else: a monopoly-making tool called a “certificate of need” or “CON.”

Overall, 38 states and Washington, D.C., enforce CON laws or close variations.

Before health care providers can launch or expand services in these jurisdictions, they first must prove to the government’s satisfaction that a need exists. All too often, this means they must prove they won’t poach talent or take revenue from established providers.

To protect the status quo further, many states allow established providers to participate in the CON process—ensuring they receive the government permission slips for themselves while denying would-be rivals.

Something similar would happen if states allowed The Home Depot to block mom-and-pop hardware stores from opening nearby. Innovation would suffer. But CON advocates claim the government favoritism is necessary in health care to prevent redundant investment and keep costs under control. They argue, for example, that too many MRI machines or surgery centers in the same region would waste money and raise prices—flipping the principle of supply and demand upside down.

Such arguments suggest the normal laws of economics do not apply in health care, a public trust removed from ordinary concerns like profit. Big hospitals promote this thinking when they warn about aggressive business tactics and “stealthy” private equity takeovers. Yet they undercut their arguments when they defend CON laws, which are all about money—more for them and less for everyone else.

Predictably, the promised CON benefits never materialize. Academic research, federal reviews, and decades of real-world experience expose CON laws as a failed experiment. The Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission sounded the alarm as far back as 2008: “By their very nature, CON laws create barriers to entry and expansion to the detriment of health care competition and consumers.”

Many governors acknowledged the harm during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic. “Conning the Competition,” a nationwide review of CON laws from our public interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, finds that 24 states and Washington, D.C., suspended CON enforcement in 2020 so health care providers could respond more nimbly to the crisis. Despite the evidence, many states embrace the protectionism anyway.

Ophthalmologist Jay Singleton knows firsthand. He owns a vision center near Fayetteville, North Carolina, where he can treat patients for thousands of dollars less than big hospitals. But the state won’t let him use the space for most of the procedures he performs. He lacks a CON, so he must drive to a competitor’s facilities two miles down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT

Costs go up, scheduling options go down, and patients suffer.

New Hampshire finally had enough and repealed its CON laws in 2016, joining California, Texas, and nine other CON-free states—representing about 40 percent of the U.S. population. The next battleground for CON reform is South Carolina. Palmetto State lawmakers have debated full repeal since at least 2015 and renewed their efforts in 2023 with Senate Bill 164.

Independent doctors would benefit from an end to the protectionism. So would consumers. Nobody wins when government bureaucrats come between licensed physicians and their patients.

Jaimie Cavanaugh is an attorney. Daryl James is a writer.

Prev

The ICU nurse shortage: How cost-cutting is endangering patient care

February 11, 2023 Kevin 0
…
Next

Opioid addiction: Understanding the risk factors with a predictive model [PODCAST]

February 11, 2023 Kevin 0
…

Tagged as: Public Health & Policy

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The ICU nurse shortage: How cost-cutting is endangering patient care
Next Post >
Opioid addiction: Understanding the risk factors with a predictive model [PODCAST]

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Jaimie Cavanaugh, JD and Daryl James

  • The impact of certificate of need laws on rural health care

    Jaimie Cavanaugh, JD and Daryl James
  • As cancer patients wait, states play favorites

    Jaimie Cavanaugh, JD and Daryl James

Related Posts

  • A perk of Medicare for all: More time for doctors and patients

    Rani Marx, PhD, MPH and James G. Kahn, PhD
  • Lawmakers don’t care for our patients. Doctors do.

    Joanna Bisgrove, MD
  • Here are some things that patients wish doctors knew

    R. Lynn Barnett
  • Why doctors should get political

    Jessica Kiarashi, MD
  • The opioid crisis: Doctors cannot lose hope

    Linda Girgis, MD
  • Punishing doctors for spreading misinformation

    Lydia Green, RPh

More in Policy

  • The lab behind the lens: Equity begins with diagnosis

    Michael Misialek, MD
  • Conflicts of interest are eroding trust in U.S. health agencies

    Martha Rosenberg
  • When America sneezes, the world catches a cold: Trump’s freeze on HIV/AIDS funding

    Koketso Masenya
  • A surgeon’s late-night crisis reveals the cost confusion in health care

    Christine Ward, MD
  • The school cafeteria could save American medicine

    Scarlett Saitta
  • Native communities deserve better: the truth about Pine Ridge health care

    Kaitlin E. Kelly
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

      M. Bennet Broner, PhD | Conditions
    • “Think twice, heal once”: Why medical decision-making needs a second opinion from your slower brain (and AI)

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Tech
    • Do Jewish students face rising bias in holistic admissions?

      Anonymous | Education
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • Internal Medicine 2025: inspiration at the annual meeting

      American College of Physicians | Physician
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • Residency as rehearsal: the new pediatric hospitalist fellowship requirement scam

      Anonymous | Physician
    • Are quotas a solution to physician shortages?

      Jacob Murphy | Education
    • The hidden bias in how we treat chronic pain

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
  • Recent Posts

    • Surviving kidney disease and reforming patient care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why we fear being forgotten more than death itself

      Patrick Hudson, MD | Physician
    • My journey from misdiagnosis to living fully with APBD

      Jeff Cooper | Conditions
    • Antimicrobial resistance: a public health crisis that needs your voice [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why a fourth year will not fix emergency medicine’s real problems

      Anna Heffron, MD, PhD & Polly Wiltz, DO | Education
    • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

      M. Bennet Broner, PhD | Conditions

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

Leave a Comment

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

      M. Bennet Broner, PhD | Conditions
    • “Think twice, heal once”: Why medical decision-making needs a second opinion from your slower brain (and AI)

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Tech
    • Do Jewish students face rising bias in holistic admissions?

      Anonymous | Education
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • Internal Medicine 2025: inspiration at the annual meeting

      American College of Physicians | Physician
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • Residency as rehearsal: the new pediatric hospitalist fellowship requirement scam

      Anonymous | Physician
    • Are quotas a solution to physician shortages?

      Jacob Murphy | Education
    • The hidden bias in how we treat chronic pain

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
  • Recent Posts

    • Surviving kidney disease and reforming patient care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why we fear being forgotten more than death itself

      Patrick Hudson, MD | Physician
    • My journey from misdiagnosis to living fully with APBD

      Jeff Cooper | Conditions
    • Antimicrobial resistance: a public health crisis that needs your voice [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why a fourth year will not fix emergency medicine’s real problems

      Anna Heffron, MD, PhD & Polly Wiltz, DO | Education
    • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

      M. Bennet Broner, PhD | Conditions

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Leave a Comment

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...