On June 15, 2007, HB2644 sponsored by Rep. Rose became law with the
effective date of September 1, 2007, instead of the original proposal
of January 1, 2008. HB2644 will directly affect the massage therapy
industry of Texas by increasing the educational hours to a minimum of
500 hours from the current 300 hours, and it eliminates the practical
exam. The bill passed the House's Public Health Committee and the
Senate's Health & Human Services Committee. The 80th Texas
Legislative session contained three bills which will have a direct
effect on the massage and bodywork professions. HB 1883 sponsored by
Rep. Anchia and HB2957 sponsored by Rep. Jackson were left pending in
the Government Reform Committee of the House of Representatives.

To the dismay of the Texas Association of Massage Therapists (TAMT),
Representative Rose was adamant about not allowing any amendments to
HB2644. At the last minute Senator Carona proposed three amendments on
the floor of the Senate; and two of those amendments were added to his
bill anyway. He did protest and a conference committee was formed
from members of the House and Senate, and when they accepted the
amendments, the bill was sent to the Governor for signature. Without
a signature or a veto, the bill became law after 10 days.

Unfortunately for the Department of State Health Services (DSHS), the
amendment providing for an Advisory Counsel did not pass. As you will
see reading on, the changes in the law will necessitate drastic
changes to the rules and regulations by the DSHS. An Ad Hoc Committee
of major stakeholders of the Massage and Bodywork Industry met with
DSHS on June 15th to collaborate with the Licensing Division to define
the new terms so the transition might be less complicated. Voluntary
Committees are being formed to advise the state of the wishes of each
group affected by the new law: Asian Bodyworkers, Somatic
Practitioners, Massage School Owners, Massage Therapy Associations, etc.

The first amendment states: "A person may not for compensation
perform or offer to perform any service with a purported health
benefit that involves physical contact with a client unless the person
holds an appropriate license". It also states that "The department
may issue one or more types of licenses not otherwise provided for by
this chapter that authorizes the license holder to perform a service
described by Subsection (c). The department may adopt rules governing
a license issued under this subsection."

This amendment has caused a flurry of questions and concerns
statewide. The original intent of this amendment was taken from Rep.
Anchia's HB1883. Rep. Anchia's district in Dallas has had significant
problems with prostitution and human trafficking. The district
attorneys and prosecutors were having trouble with the charges
sticking in court because the "bad actors" in his district were
calling themselves "Asian Bodyworkers" or "Asian Spas" or even just
"Spas". With such classification they did not have to comply to the
massage therapy licensing laws. Although the TAMT board of directors
was not pleased with massage therapy being associated with
prostitution one more time, they realized from the many complaints
they had received through the years that this was not just a Dallas
problem. Persons performing touch therapies across the state have
been able to skirt the licensing issue claiming that they were not
"massage therapists" but defined themselves as Bodyworkers, Structural
Integration Practitioners, Somatic Practitioners or one of the hundred
other bodywork techniques.

Using the terminology of "physical contact for purported health
benefits" is vague and open to interpretation by the state. Some have
expressed apprehension over the fact that dance teachers, yoga and
Pilates instructors, martial arts instructors, etc. will need licenses
in order to practice. In all the meetings that I've had with the
Representatives and legislative aides at the capitol, regulating those
professions was never their intent; therefore I hope that DSHS will
not overstep the boundaries to include those businesses. During the
first Ad Hoc Committee meeting with DSHS, Dan Meador, the DSHS legal
representative, explained that the law change gives them the right to
establish the possibility of multiple licenses, such as: a massage and
bodywork license, a massage therapy license, a Somatic Practices
License, an Asian Bodywork license or even a license for each modality
imaginable. Because no provision was made in the law for additional
staff for DSHS to implement these changes, we don't believe such
drastic changes will take place.

HB2644's sole intent sought to raise the education standard for
massage therapy instruction in the State of Texas to be equal to
National standards. With the last minute amendments, the bill now has
long term repercussions and need for clarifications. Although it is
understood that those therapists currently licensed in Texas will
automatically be grandfathered, I posed the question about
grandfathering the other touch therapies alluded to in the bill. The
DSHS staff present at the first committee meeting did not have a clue
how they will go about implementing all these revisions. The major
impact will be on the schools. Is the state prepared to approve each
school's curriculum additions by September 1st, 2007? Will the
schools be able to hire teachers for the new subjects in the
curriculum (pathology, kinesiology, CPR, other techniques)? The
school owners are also in a quandary as to the start date of their
next sessions. The wording in the law states that a student
"enrolled" before September 1st will only need to complete the 300
hour curriculum. Will some schools enroll students before September
1st even though their classes don't begin until 2008 or later? Will
those students feel slighted or under educated if they miss out on the
additional required subjects? How fast can the schools find qualified
massage therapy instructors to teach the new subjects?

The good news is that eventually the schools will have the option to
expand their curriculums to offer students different educational
tracks, such as specialties in Spa Massage, Medical Massage, Sports
Massage, Asian Bodywork, etc. We may even see national bodywork and
somatic practices schools come to Texas.

Now to touch on the second amendment ! It basically includes harsher
penalties for practicing without a license and more law enforcement
capabilities. It also provides penalties for any operator,
supervisor or owner of a massage establishment or school who is not in
compliance with the statute and the rules.

Will the state have to establish a separate license for each school
represented by each different license or modality? Will the state
license instructors for those modalities? Will Continuing Education
in any category be acceptable for all the different licenses? Will
each license require continuing education as massage therapy does now?
We still have tons of questions to be answered, but be assured that
there are concerned professionals involved working diligently to
protect the rights and welfare of the "Touch for Purported Health
Benefit Industry!"

Janine Ray, LMT, MTI, CE Provider, ME Owner
Legislative Chairperson
Texas Association of Massage Therapists

For more detailed information or copies of these bills, log on to
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us. For questions regarding the changes
in rules and regulations: http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/massage/mt_new.shtm
Texas Association of Massage Therapists
http://www.texasmassagetherapists.com/