4000

VETOES

certain related institutions [[need not carry
malpractice insurance]] are required to obtain
malpractice insurance as a prerequisite to obtaining
or retaining a license to operate; providing that
schools of beauty culture may operate at certain
times; providing for part—time students; and
specifying a certain student—faculty ratio for those
schools.

May 15, 1975.
Honorable John Hanson Briscoe
Speaker of the House of Delegates
State House
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Mr. Speaker:

In accordance with Article II, Section 17 of the
Maryland Constitution, I have today vetoed House Bill
679.

This bill requires beauty shops and related
institutions to obtain malpractice insurance as a
prerequisite to obtaining or retaining a license to
operate. It further specifies the courses which certain
schools of beauty culture may provide, and specifies the
times during which certain schools may operate.

As originally drafted, House Bill 679 provided that
the obtaining of malpractice insurance was not a
condition precedent to licensure of a beauty shop, school
of beauty culture, or postgraduate school of beauty
culture. During the legislative process, the bill was
sent to conference committee; the committee report
reversed the original intent of the bill so that proof of
malpractice insurance was required in order to obtain a
license to operate any shop or school mentioned above.

The State Board of Cosmetologists has advised me
that such a requirement would seriously impede the
effective regulation of the practice of cosmetology. In
addition, both of the sponsors of House Bill 679 have
requested that I veto this bill because it was not their
intent to require malpractice insurance as a condition
precedent to licensure.

For these reasons, I have decided to veto House Bill
679.

Sincerely,

/s/ Marvin Mandel

Governor