Probably for the first time ever, a bill repealing the state’s certificate of need for healthcare providers not only made it on a committee agenda, but it received a lengthy debate before being voted down.

I’ll admit, I had assumed it might not make it through the House Health and Human Resources Committee last Tuesday. I knew the lobbying pressure for and against CON repeal would be high. House Republicans caucused right before Tuesday’s meeting, Republican members of the committee caucused before the meeting and again more than four hours of testimony.

What I didn’t expect was how close the vote would be. House Bill 4013 failed in committee 10-12. I’m told that behind-the-scenes the vote could have gone either way. I have a feeling had it made it to the House floor, it could have possibly passed.

The vote was close enough that I’m told that a new bill might be offered to create a CON repeal pilot project, perhaps aimed at the Northern and Eastern panhandles. Both regions have issues that would make them perfect for a pilot. I don’t have to remind many of you about the hospital issues in Wheeling over the last few years. And many in the Eastern Panhandle have to go to Virginia or Maryland for procedures they can’t get conveniently in West Virginia.

I’m not here to advocate for or against CON repeal, but it sure sounds like lawmakers at least understand the process probably needs reformed in West Virginia. One of the things revealed during testimony is that though CON rejections are few and far between, far more healthcare providers don’t even bother to apply because they already know they’d be rejected.

It also turns out that most appeals of CON approvals come from other healthcare providers trying to block new competition versus a healthcare entity appealing rejection of a CON. And since CON appeals ultimately end up in circuit court – and sometimes the state Supreme Court of Appeals – it’s simply not worth the fight and the court costs.

Either way, it sounds like the debate Tuesday showed some lawmakers that a pilot project is worth trying.

••••••

I walked into the State Capitol Building last week with Senate President Craig Blair, R-Berkeley, who was still over the moon that the House had passed Senate Bill 4, lifting the prohibition on nuclear power plant construction in West Virginia.

Blair knew that there was an opportunity to pass such a bill after attending a conference last year and bumping into Delegate Kayla Young, D-Kanawha. That gave Blair hope that such a bill would get wide bipartisan support, and it did in both the House and state Senate.

Before you start freaking out (and I’m honestly not sure why you would considering the safety record and the innovations that allow less fuel to be used to produce nuclear power), I’d say it’s unlikely West Virginia will be home to a new nuclear reactor in the near-future.

If anything, the bill was more of a messaging bill. The fact that the coal-loving West Virginia Legislature was able to pass such a bill and do so relatively quickly, Blair believes that will send a message to business, industries, and manufacturers that West Virginia can be flexible to their needs.

The bill came out of discussions with Nucor, the North Carolina-based steel manufacturer that is putting in a new steel mill in Mason County. The company uses electric arc furnaces instead of coal-fired furnaces. The company is dedicated to further cutting its greenhouse gas emissions by seeking out cleaner sources of electricity.

As I predicted, the West Virginia Coal Association wasn’t happy. But there is nothing wrong with courting all forms of electric generation.

••••••

Of note: two of the top 10 owners of Nucor is BlackRock Fund Advisors and BlackRock Investment Management. BlackRock is the financial institution that State Treasurer Riley Moore announced a few weeks ago he was removing state funds from due to their “net zero” greenhouse gas output goals.

It was a nice national public relations move to get one on Fox News and other conservative news outlets. Hopefully the stance doesn’t jeopardize the Nucor Mason County project.

••••••

“The Hill,” a Washington D.C. publication that covers all things Congress, reported last week that 2nd District Congressman Alex Mooney has opened a legal defense fund to help cover costs stemming from the Office of Congressional Ethics investigation over the summer and the House Ethics Committee investigation that is ongoing.

An internal memorandum released by the campaign of 1st District Congressman David McKinley, Mooney’s Republican opponent in the new northern 2nd Congressional District, found that the Mooney campaign spent 50 cents for every campaign donation raised in October, November and December of last year. Mooney is under investigation for alleged personal use of campaign donations.

The year-end campaign finance reports were submitted to the Federal Election Commission last week covering all of 2021. Mooney still has more cash on hand than McKinley, but Mooney is slowly depleting those funds on expensive TV ads and on legal expenses.

McKinley also is outraising Mooney. In the last three months of 2021, McKinley raised approximately $600,000 compared to the more than $200,000 Mooney raised. McKinley is also able to self-fund, putting in more than $500,000 of his own money in the race during the quarter.

Don’t let it be said this is not a real race.

(Adams is the state government reporter for Ogden Newspapers. He can be contacted at sadams@newsandsentinel.com)