Health: other; palliative care advisory task force; create. Amends 1978 PA 368 (MCL 333.1101 - 333.25211) by adding sec. 2220.
SB 483 would amend Michigan’s Public Health Code to create a palliative care advisory task force within the Department. The task force would be appointed by the governor with Senate advice and consent and would include representatives from hospices and home care agencies, palliative care clinicians, legislative nominees, insurers, children’s palliative care advocates, hospitals, and nonprofit health care organizations. Members would serve four-year terms, meet at least quarterly, and operate under the Open Meetings Act and Freedom of Information Act.
The task force’s core duties would be to study palliative care in Michigan and advise the Legislature and Department on how to define palliative care, expand access, identify available services and reimbursement methods, develop performance metrics, collaborate with stakeholders, educate the public, and assess provider capacity. Beginning January 1, 2028, it would also have to publish an annual public report listing palliative care services available in the state and services that are not currently offered but would be beneficial.
The bill would add a new section to the Public Health Code establishing a formal state advisory body focused on palliative care policy. It would not directly change coverage or reimbursement rules, but it would create a mechanism for future recommendations that could influence health care regulation, insurance reimbursement, provider standards, and public health planning. The bill also imposes transparency requirements through open meetings and FOIA coverage, and it requires annual reporting to the public and policymakers.
The available voting history suggests generally favorable support for the bill. It was reported favorably out of committee on an 8-0 vote and later passed the Senate on third reading by a 32-3 vote, indicating broad bipartisan acceptance. The lack of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the strong votes imply that lawmakers viewed the measure as a constructive policy and information-gathering step rather than a controversial mandate.
There is little evidence of major controversy in the available record, but the structure of the task force suggests the main policy questions would likely concern representation and scope. The bill deliberately includes stakeholders from hospices, clinicians, insurers, hospitals, children’s advocates, and nonprofit health systems, which may reflect an effort to balance provider, payer, and patient interests. Potential points of concern could include the advisory body’s composition, the governor’s appointment authority, and whether the task force’s recommendations could lead to future reimbursement or regulatory changes, but no specific objections are documented in the provided materials.