Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateFloridaVetoed
SB 688: Naturopathic Medicine
Fiscal Policy
SB 688 status: Vetoed — Vetoed by Governor (updated Jun 26, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
45OUT OF 100
Score:45/100 civic fit
Risk:Moderate Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 40/100
Constitutionality85%
Bipartisan50%
Public opinion50%
Bill summary
Naturopathic Medicine; Creating the Board of Naturopathic Medicine within the Department of Health; prohibiting unlicensed persons from practicing naturopathic medicine or promoting, identifying, or describing themselves using specified titles or abbreviations; providing for licensure by examination of naturopathic doctors; providing for licensure by endorsement of naturopathic doctors; revising continuing education requirements for naturopathic doctors, etc.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Mixed / Neutral
45%
Benefits
- standardizes professional credentialing
- creates a clear pathway for market entry
- enhances consumer protections for patients
Risks
- administrative costs of new board
- compliance burdens for practitioners
- regulatory barriers to market entry
Society
Mixed / Neutral
45%
Benefits
- expands access to chosen healthcare practitioners
- improves consumer transparency via licensure
- standardizes the quality of alternative care
Risks
- risk of confusion between ND and medical doctors
- potential for reduced access to evidence-based care
- disputes over clinical efficacy standards
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Mixed / Neutral
50%
Benefits
- establishes a state board for oversight
- mandates standardized licensing requirements
- provides disciplinary structure for complaints
Risks
- creates new state government bureaucracy
- risk of agency capture by the profession
- complexity of administrative rulemaking
Public Health & Safety
Critical outlook
40%
Benefits
- sets minimum safety standards for practice
- provides oversight for professional conduct
- mandates continuing education requirements
Risks
- concerns over scope of practice safety
- potential medical misinformation risks
- substitution of unproven treatments for care
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
The bill was vetoed by the Governor, suggesting executive disagreement with the regulatory framework.
Analysis scope
Only provided with summary-level metadata from OpenStates.
04
Where it stands
Official recordVetoed by Governor
- IntroducedComplete
- CommitteeComplete
- Chamber votesComplete
- Final agreementComplete
- GovernorUpcoming
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.