Windham County NAACP urges changes to S142 to ease relicensing for internationally trained physicians

Diana, representing the Windham County NAACP Health Justice Committee, told the legislative committee the bill known as S142 should be amended to reflect local stakeholders and to remove avoidable barriers for internationally trained physicians (ITPs) who could help address Vermont’s physician shortage.

Diana said the bill’s amendment that currently refers to a “Vermont chapter of the NAACP” should be changed to the “Windham County NAACP” because, she said, there is no statewide chapter and her committee led the advocacy on S142. She also urged the committee to insert a workforce-authorization definition that would allow applicants with pending federal work authorization to begin the licensure process while making clear the pathway is not open to applicants who reside outside the United States.

Her third drafting recommendation was procedural: rely on the World Directory of Medical Schools (the same directory used by ECFMG for credential verification) rather than naming multiple, inconsistent accreditation lists. "There is no single global accreditation authority," she said, and a single dependable source would streamline verification.

Diana summarized outreach the committee conducted: of 23 respondents to outreach, 16 agreed to in-depth interviews; 13 of those 16 live in Vermont and three would move to the state if the pathway existed. She said only four of the 16 interviewed would meet the bill’s current ‘‘three of the last five years’’ recency requirement, and she proposed changing that to at least one year of practice within the past seven years to enlarge the eligible pool.

Diana also read five anonymized physician testimonies. One physician summarized by Diana said: "I have the knowledge to do so much more, but in this country, no value is placed on my past education and experience." The accounts included clinical and administrative experience across specialties, prior licensing outside the U.S., and ongoing USMLE preparation.

Mike Zimmer, policy consultant for World Education Services, told the committee S142 follows a model now being adopted in many states. "This is not an immigration bill. This is a workforce bill," he said, adding that roughly two dozen states have enacted similar provisional-licensure legislation and several have begun issuing licenses under those programs. Zimmer said typical safeguards include graduation from a school listed in the World Directory, prior licensing and good standing in the original jurisdiction, ECFMG certification, passage of USMLE steps required by the state, and a bonafide offer of employment from an eligible hiring entity.

On a point raised by committee members, Zimmer recommended the bill require that applicants were in good standing at the time they departed their country of licensure. He also described an exception used in some states for ‘‘non-cooperating’’ countries where it is impossible to procure records because the home jurisdiction will not provide documentation.

Committee members questioned several operational details, including what jurisdictions count for criminal-record checks and whether a foreign license revoked under political duress should automatically bar an applicant. Diana and Zimmer said the bill should clarify the standard and allow the board limited discretion to address cases where documentation is unavailable or where revocation reflects persecution rather than criminal conduct.

No vote or formal action on S142 was recorded in the morning session; witnesses offered follow-up material and several hospital CEOs volunteered to testify about workforce needs and employer safeguards. Committee members asked for more data on projected applicant volume and the fiscal note supporting staffing for license review.

The committee paused for the legislative floor and planned to continue consideration later; several witnesses offered to provide written examples of the suggested statutory language and to return for additional questions.