Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Ramos/Gallegos
/Scott/Thornton/Paul
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 02/17/2025
SHORT TITLE
Health Care Workers Conscience Protection
Act
BILL
NUMBER Senate Bill 347/ec
ANALYST Chilton
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
HCA
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Recurring General Fund
HCA
Indeterminate,
potentially
substantial
Indeterminate,
potentially
substantial
Indeterminate,
potentially
substantial
Indeterminate,
potentially
substantial
Recurring Federal Funds
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Relates to House Bills 234 and 236 and to Senate Bill 57.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Health Care Authority (HCA)
Agency Analysis was Solicited but Not Received From
New Mexico Medical Board (NMMB)
Agency Declined to Respond
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Senate Bill 319
Senate Bill 347 would create the Health Care Workers Conscience Protection Act. Any health
care worker (widely defined in Section 2 of the bill) could for conscientious or religious reasons
refuse to participate in any way(s) in abortion or abortion-related services (which would include
provision of information about abortion and referral to a provider of abortion), and could not be
subjected by professional or licensing entities or employers to discipline or employment actions
for that refusal. The employer could replace the refusing person’s involvement in the case with
another provider, who would be given access to the patient’s medical records. Health care
payers – insurers – could not be subjected to adverse action based on their conscience-based
refusal to pay for an abortion-related service.
Senate Bill 347/ec – Page 2
According to Section 4 of the bill, health care institutions that provide abortions must notify all
affiliated health care workers with a copy of the act within 30 days of its going into effect, and
each new hire must be provided by the institution with a copy within 14 days of hiring. A
summary of the act’s provisions must also be posted on the institution’s premises.
This bill contains an emergency clause and would become effective as soon as it is signed by the
governor.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
There is no appropriation in Senate Bill 347.
According to the Health Care Authority (HCA):
HCA may be required to amend regulations to account for SB347 at an unknown cost.
Additionally, compliance with SB347 may put health care institutions that receive federal
funding, such as Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements, at risk of penalties or loss of
funding if the refusal of care violates federal mandates such as the Federal Emergency
Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA).
LFC staff assume HCA could amend regulations using existing resources.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
HCA notes:
SB347 may conflict with 42 U.S. Code § 1395dd, which guarantees examination and
treatment for emergency medical conditions and women in labor. Federal law requires
hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment, including abortion-related emergency care
when necessary.
SB347 would increase the difficulty of obtaining abortion services, which is a statutorily
protected right in New Mexico. SB347 allows health workers to deny abortion-related
services and to also limit information on where patients can receive services. Healthcare
professionals and entities would not be required to inform patients of available funding or
contact information. The rule’s expansive definition of health care worker could, for
example, extend to a pharmacist filling a prescription, a receptionist scheduling an
appointment for consultation, or an ambulance driver transporting a pregnant person for
an emergency abortion.
HCA notes the following:
SB347 broadly defines “abortion” well beyond a common definition of the term. It
includes, as part of the definition, “...the provision of information about abortion,
provision of a referral to another health care worker that provides abortion”. Under
common usage, the term “abortion” does not include providing information about
abortion or referring someone to another health care worker.
SB347 does not clarify how institutions should handle cases in which a patient's
emergency care is delayed due to conscience-based objections. There is no requirement
for institutions to have alternative providers available or to arrange timely transfers to
facilities that will provide care. This could create enforcement challenges and potential
gaps in emergency care.
Senate Bill 347/ec – Page 3
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
This bill relates to House Bill 234, which would require abortion-providers to provide
resuscitation to any fetus delivered with signs of life, to House Bill 236, which would require any
healthcare facility prescribing mifepristone to post a notification that the drug’s effects can be
reversed in some circumstances, and to Senate Bill 57, which would exclude personal
information on abortion-related healthcare providers from the Inspection of Public Records Act.
LAC/hj/SL2