2210                                      VETOES

The Bill would authorize the use of chiropractors for treatment of
medically indigent persons under our State program for medical care
for indigent persons and would also authorize such usage under the
Baltimore City program for medical care for the indigent.

In connection with my consideration of the Bill, representatives
of the State Departments of Health and Mental Hygiene, the State
Department of Public Welfare, the Medical and Chirurgical Faculty
of Maryland, the Maryland State Conference of Social Welfare, the
Hospital Council of Maryland, the Heart Association of Maryland,
the Maryland Cancer Society, the Maryland State Dental Associa-
tion and other interested groups advanced serious arguments in
opposition to the Bill.

Speaking in favor of the Bill were representatives of the Mary-
land State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, the Maryland Chiro-
practic Association and other interested groups and individuals.

Without expressing an opinion at this time as to the validity, vel
non, of the respective arguments of the proponents and opponents
of the Bill, I think that all will agree that the Maryland Medical
Care Program for the medically indigent has achieved an enviable
record of successful administration within the framework of the
present law. Under the present law, medical care of the indigent is
limited to physicians, dentists and hospitals. This Bill would make
available to the medically indigent one additional field of the heal-
ing arts.

The opponents to this Bill made a convincing case that to broaden
the law to include another type of care, namely chiropractic, would
not be in the best interests of a good medical program. Serious
doubt was raised as to the training and education of chiropractors.
The Maryland State Health Department believes that chiropractic as
a method of therapy has no sound scientific basis. The Commis-
sioner of Health pointed out that they are not employed in the State
hospitals or clinics.

This Bill would put chiropractic treatment in the State's program
of medical care. I do not believe that I should attempt to determine
the merits or demerits of chiropractic treatment. I do believe, how-
ever, that since there is general agreement that chiropractic treat
ment is not medical treatment, that it should not be included in the
medical treatment program. I am hopeful that the two groups, medi-
cal and chiropractic, would get together and make an earnest effort
to settle their differences.

For the above reasons I feel compelled to veto this Bill.
With kindest regards, I am

Sincerely yours,

(S) J. MILLARD TAWES,

Governor.
JMT/ECM/ae