A plan to exempt Mayo Clinic in Rochester from Minnesota nurse staffing legislation is gaining traction, but the special treatment is upsetting the rest of the state's hospitals.
Negotiations accelerated last week after Mayo threatened to relocate a billion-dollar expansion project outside Minnesota if it was subject to the staffing legislation and another proposal to penalize hospitals with excessive spending growth.
House Speaker Melissa Hortman said on WCCO-TV Sunday that an exemption would be appropriate for the internationally renowned medical provider.
"Mayo is different," said Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park. "Mayo is an asset that is known all over the world. There are not other hospitals in the state that have kings and princes flying in to stay to get treatment."
The bill would require committees of executives, nurses and other providers in Minnesota hospitals to agree on nurse staffing levels in their units or to resolve their differences through arbitration. Mayo lobbied for an exemption because it has an automated system that determines staffing needs faster than any committee — and argued that any other hospital with a similarly sophisticated system should be able to opt out.
The staffing proposal is one of several reforms that the DFL-led legislature has urged this session to fix a health care system that is growing in cost even as it becomes less accessible. Nursing shortages are leading to overcrowded nursing homes and hospital units, which has resulted in backlogs in emergency departments.
A Mayo-only compromise upset leaders of the Minnesota Hospital Association, which has predicted that hospitals will be forced to close units and deny admission to patients when they cannot meet legally binding committee staffing requirements. The association estimated disruptions for 70,000 Minnesota patients per year.
"Any alternative pathway that works for one health care system must work for all," said Dr. Rahul Koranne, chief executive of the trade group that represents most Minnesota hospitals, but not Mayo. He argued that the rules under which health care is provided to kings should be the same for farmers and seniors.