Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

HHS Revokes Public Comment Requirement on Certain Policy Changes

Client Alert
March 5, 2025

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has announced the immediate revocation of the longstanding Richardson Waiver, a policy requiring public notice and comment on certain agency decisions involving contracts, grants, benefits, property, and public loans. This move, detailed in a March 3 policy statement by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., eliminates a key mechanism for stakeholder input on agency policy shifts.

Key Policy Changes

The elimination of the Richardson Waiver means that HHS will no longer be required to allow a 60-day public comment period before finalizing policy changes related to grants and benefits. As a result, HHS will now have the ability to implement new policies much more quickly, potentially impacting Medicaid and National Institutes of Health funding rules. This change eliminates opportunities for healthcare providers and other stakeholders to weigh in on crucial policy decisions – like implementing Medicaid work requirements – before they take effect. This change does not impact Medicare, which follows separate statutory public input rules and remains subject to different procedural requirements.

Industry groups have expressed concerns that eliminating public comment could lead to less transparency and hastily implemented policies that lack sufficient vetting. Without an opportunity for public review, new regulations may be more prone to unintended consequences, creating additional burdens for states, providers, and patients.

What This Means for Healthcare Providers

Healthcare providers and other stakeholders should prepare for more rapid and potentially unpredictable policy shifts from HHS. The absence of a formal comment process means that affected entities may need to explore alternative advocacy strategies to engage with policymakers.

We will continue to monitor developments and provide updates on any significant policy changes stemming from this decision. Please contact BMD Healthcare Member Daphne Kackloudis at dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com or Attorney Jordan Burdick at jaburdick@bmdllc.com with any questions about how this may impact your organization.

Healthcare PolicyHealth LawHealthcareDaphne KackloudisJesse Wilde
Client Alert

Counselor, Social Workers, and Marriage and Family Therapist (CSWMFT) Board Rule Changes

March 29, 2024The Counselor, Social Workers, and Marriage and Family Therapist (CSWMFT) Board has proposed changes to the Ohio Administrative Code rules discussed below. The rules are scheduled for a public hearing on April 23, 2024, and public comments are due by this date. Please reach out to BMD Member Daphne Kackloudis for help preparing comments on these rules or for additional information.Client Alert

Latest Batch of Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board Rules: What Providers Should Know

March 25, 2024The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board recently released several new rules and proposed amendments to existing rules over the past few months. A hearing for the new rules was held on February 16, 2024, but the Board has not yet finalized them.Client Alert

Now in Effect: DOL Final Rule on Classification of Independent Contractors

March 21, 2024Effective March 11, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has adopted a new standard for the classification of employees versus independent contractors — a much anticipated update since the DOL issued its Final Rule on January 9, 2024, as previously discussed by BMD.  In brief, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) creates significant protections for workers related to minimum wage, overtime pay, and record-keeping requirements. That said, such protection only exists for employees. This can incentivize entities to classify workers as independent contractors; however, misclassification is risky and can be costly.Client Alert

Florida's Recent Ruling on Arbitration Clauses

March 15, 2024Florida’s recent ruling on arbitration clauses provides a crucial distinction in determining whether such clauses are void as against public policy and providers may have the opportunity to include arbitration clauses in their patient consent forms. On March 6, 2024, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeals reversed and remanded Florida’s Fifteenth Circuit Court ruling of Piero Palacios v. Sharnice Lawson. The Court of Appeals ruled that the parties’ arbitration agreement did not contradict the Legislature’s intent of Florida’s Medical Malpractice Act (the “MMA”), but rather reflects the parties’ choice to arbitrate claims entirely outside of the MMA’s framework. Therefore, the Court found that the agreement was not void as against public policy.Client Alert

Corporate Transparency Act Update 3/14/24

March 14, 2024On March 1, 2024, a federal district court in the Northern District of Alabama concluded that the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) exceeded Congressional powers and enjoined the Department of the Treasury from enforcing the CTA against the plaintiffs. National Small Business United v. Yellen, No. 5:22-cv-01448 (N.D. Ala.). On March 11, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice appealed the district court’s decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Older posts
Newer posts