[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6565895,"mediaKeyId","3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b","parentId",3212499,"title","Committee debates solvency guardrails and whether to move oversight of pooled-risk plans to insurance department","audioSeconds",1940,"startMs",1630000,"endMs",3570000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b&start=1630&end=3570","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b/thumbnail_1630000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6565895/New-Hampshire/Committee-debates-solvency-guardrails-and-whether-to-move-oversight-of-pooled-risk-plans-to-insurance-department","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6565895-481bbfffa3e299fbd5e79da21dfce6a7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771050502&Signature=C60libicW~ArhAHiQDuReJCeRUrYiODOFlsNNwA0G9W4DBck-jOYcXQzk-UXoY~HqOcT6Cbg5UV3TFS4WP0sthk4v1C2Wk3FGk0YCy~q1jEwsBUfWNdOL-hOz8sZLeoGvRHQFQca~GRXul0CiwrLG08ZykCrtPWHSWaWzorIOxJoZmbdRJlprjjDG1bDLr6EWbVXs-K-RLT~bYKBzbhB270vOKaPPPfiG-gZbZg-LftPQ5ckHTxB-eF19b~1ZiCRiaaKDPEQ75-QmptPmYho0VwhesXR9I81XxFPKWLw4eyUYbtk-73CPAqenfSrU~lW2lHnJupyjYLAiU6Kiyln2w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-05-08T03:37:06Z","article","CONCORD — The House Health Insurance Committee spent the bulk of its hearing debating legislation to set minimum reserve standards and other financial safeguards for municipal pooled-risk organizations that provide health coverage to cities, towns and school districts. Committee members heard testimony about recent insolvencies and a proposal to move oversight from the Secretary of State's Office to the New Hampshire Insurance Department for day-to-day solvency supervision.

Committee chair and members said they wanted to pass a bill this year to reduce the risk of insolvency among pooled-risk groups but left open where ultimate regulatory responsibility should sit. The committee agreed to develop an amendment for next week that would set solvency standards in statute while delegating numeric implementation and enforcement to the Insurance Department through rulemaking.

Why it matters: pooled-risk organizations are run by political subdivisions that jointly self-insure to obtain coverage at scale. If a pooled risk runs out of reserves, member towns and school districts ultimately face the costs — a direct taxpayer exposure. Witnesses said recent events show the current framework has left gaps in early intervention and solvency oversight.

Secretary Scanlon, representing the Secretary of State's Office, outlined the office's current role under RSA 5 and defended its statutory charge while acknowledging the Insurance Department has tools focused on solvency. \"We can certainly have a discussion on which state agency is appropriate. Maybe insurance is the best place,\" he said, adding the office has acted under the statute to raise the issue with the Legislature.

Testimony from committee counsel and outside witnesses described specific recent problems. A department witness said one pooled-risk entity, HealthTrust, self-reported in spring 2023 that reserves had fallen to concerning levels; the committee was told reserves fell to roughly \"about 10 days of operating funds to pay claims,\" a level witnesses characterized as dangerously low.

A departmental actuary presented an estimate included in committee materials that, if no corrective action is taken, HealthTrust's rates could rise as much as roughly 40% over a three-year period to rebuild reserves. Committee members and the Secretary's Office also recounted a prior episode when large surplus reserves were returned to members (described in testimony as a roughly $40,000,000 distribution), a decision witnesses said later strained the organizations when claims rebounded after the pandemic.

Several members argued that the Insurance Department has a century-long regulatory focus on solvency, with on-staff actuaries and established monitoring tools. Representative Chorazin stated, \"All of the things that you're asking, which are perfectly reasonable, are in place in the insurance department.\" Opponents cautioned that shifting oversight could change how pooled-risk organizations operate and raised concerns about perceived conflicts because the Insurance Department is funded by fees and assessments on regulated entities.

The committee conducted a straw vote on whether to pursue an amendment to put the administration and numeric rulemaking under the Insurance Department; the chair recorded a straw tally of members in favor and opposed. Members agreed to draft an amendment for the next meeting that would: set statutory guardrails and reserve thresholds, remove hard-coded dollar amounts from statute, and require the Insurance Department to implement specific numeric ranges and assessments by rule.

No final committee vote was recorded on the underlying bill during this session. Committee members said the goal is to pass a bill this year that will reduce the risk of insolvency while allowing technical details to be set through Insurance Department rulemaking rather than fixed statutory amounts.

Observers and municipal representatives who submitted letters to the committee told members they want stronger, more proactive monitoring; municipal finance officers and pool board members also oppose sudden, sharp premium increases and prefer an orderly rebuild of reserves. The committee set an amendment drafting deadline and signaled it expects to revisit the measure at the next hearing.

What's next: committee staff will circulate an amendment for next week's meeting designed to retain statutory guardrails but delegate numeric implementation to the New Hampshire Insurance Department via its rulemaking process. Members said any committee amendment must be ready in time for committee deadlines in the fall if it is to reach the House floor in January.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Commerce and Consumer Affairs (05/07/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","The House Health Insurance Committee debated legislation to require minimum reserves and new early-warning reporting for pooled-risk health plans, and wrestled with whether to transfer day-to-day solvency oversight from the Secretary of State's Office to the New Hampshire Insurance Department.","taxTitle","Commerce and Consumer Affairs, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17743,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6565887,"Committee backs modernization of continuing-care retirement community statute, requiring quarterly financial reporting and member protections",204,876000,1080000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b&start=876&end=1080","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b/thumbnail_876000.jpg","/articles/6565887/New-Hampshire/Committee-backs-modernization-of-continuing-care-retirement-community-statute-requiring-quarterly-financial-reporting-and-member-protections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6565887-14d8f4e3b5b2c6e63f2f5f0e1c4e6351/orig.mp4?Expires=1771050502&Signature=nid7icYPYRWFIm2AY0BjOAPGlx2uxWVWVxRsg1LmXSwXCU-bahpLqQBy7e4lN2G4noiuCZxPGNnhYNWPTOD3vd6uiyw7gf-eDMvbPv-AAJNWe1eCSNVsYA9yXtomcEYwChpwpFUofoAEVrYRC~0e7y3Qpvqv4WNhesefxJouTg7Tjr9eXobsug0X-1uOlbKl30nSxxet8u~hzUcSiepcgX-k9jZWrD7BH3ezv~kCKpf7mdsBzLSzDVCl4jD41wRwMbw-yRf~4rIEGMMHSyhtHcqFobw3P-unhuVT3hCyGxS-88oBC5kYWR5h~mzNZCn-4GegLb5MOTcbcBxg22Lvdw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CONCORD — The House Health Insurance Committee moved to report a rewritten continuing-care retirement community (CCRC) statute, updating provisions adopted in 1989 and adding new protections and financial reporting requirements.

Steve Nottinger, an attorney with the New Hampshire Insurance Department, told the committee the bill modernizes nearly every section of the 1989 statute. \"The continuing care retirement, community bill that you have is, a rewrite of an existing bill that was, that was, approved in in 1989. It's designed to modernize the bill and also add protections that we've, deemed necessary based upon our experience with CCRCs,\" Nottinger said.

Key changes described in testimony include a quarterly financial reporting requirement to provide an early warning when a CCRC's finances deteriorate; creation of a bill of rights for residents to clarify resident protections; and clarified rules on entrance fees and removal of residents for safety reasons. Department witnesses said the changes would let regulators act more quickly if a CCRC faces financial difficulty.

The committee recorded a voice/hand vote in favor of the bill (chair recorded group tallies). The motion to report the bill as \"ought to pass\" was made and carried during the hearing.

What changed: the proposed legislation replaces the 1989 provisions with modernized language, requires quarterly reporting of CCRC finances to the Insurance Department and establishes clearer procedural protections for residents.

Votes: committee members recorded the motion to pass as carried (chair recorded yes votes).","The committee voted to report a rewrite of the continuing-care retirement community (CCRC) statute, updating a 1989 law to add early-warning reporting, a CCRC \"bill of rights,\" and clarified rules on entrance fees and involuntary removals.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6565891,"Committee reduces notice window for Medicare Advantage withdrawals to 90 days in amendment to SB121",81,499000,580000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b&start=499&end=580","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212499-33c674fd0857840d4571ce411238fb2b/thumbnail_499000.jpg","/articles/6565891/New-Hampshire/Committee-reduces-notice-window-for-Medicare-Advantage-withdrawals-to-90-days-in-amendment-to-SB121","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6565891-52aa551b249af8bce4872ed278b10a5a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771050502&Signature=FblTU7fmDSyE~zc9HhU4ttto2kvHGRFJaBTZcsYYIAuAHCdtcMbmZhGMu1XrU4PdAbE~E63UJJK9aqUD8p1veyhvKnCNHq7dzms57ab2eC4jMSNTKCOvUYFvHGJSdedYCNOpvdsDNtVIWg3BntePaeUcxCYpoHq~2j0czdP8j8tr0lQ4iDuPoUtz~sukXClf~ldRXE7apWp0nxDTZBO0sgRMsuyAmhJKCw5Zjk5xU2i0pznSKolQr~-Y3qtoabIU0NqgTxZcrep3Zqb4QGpWy36Q~WGKvgD9j-RmTFWpSY9fUms~6NFQ8YbGvCYGvJe6U6M8qpm5ol5-1XnqzQv9uA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CONCORD — The House Health Insurance Committee approved amendment 1945 to Senate Bill 121 on a voice/hand vote, changing the bill's notice requirement for Medicare Advantage plans that cease offering coverage in the state.

The amendment, explained by Jennifer Smith, legislative director for the New Hampshire Insurance Department, reduces the bill's written-notice requirement from 120 days to 90 days so it aligns with federal requirements for Medicare Advantage plans. Smith also said the amendment struck a direct Code of Federal Regulations citation in section 3 to avoid confusion over the correct citation.

\"What amendment 19 45 h does is just further clarify some concerns that were brought to us by the carriers,\" Jennifer Smith said. \"The original bill, in sections 2 and 3, had a hundred and 20 days written notice, and we've scaled that back to 90 days written notice so that it aligns with federal requirements. And then in section 3, we just struck out, the federal CFR that was specifically listed because there was some confusion if that was the correct citation or not.\"

Committee members asked whether the change reflected difficulties experienced by beneficiaries when plans withdraw. A committee member described phone calls they received when a plan pulled out of the state and said the shorter, aligned notice period should help the Insurance Department provide timely information to affected beneficiaries.

The committee then voted to adopt amendment 1945 on SB121 (amendment tally recorded by the chair). After adopting the amendment, the committee voted to report the bill as \"ought to pass\" as amended.

What changed: the bill now requires 90 days of written notice to the Insurance Department from any Medicare Advantage plan that intends to stop offering coverage in the state; the amendment removes the explicit CFR citation from the statute text.

Votes: the committee adopted amendment 1945 (recorded aye count: 7). The committee subsequently voted to report SB121 \"ought to pass\" as amended (committee recorded the motion as carried).","The committee approved amendment 1945 to Senate Bill 121, cutting a proposed 120-day written-notice requirement for Medicare Advantage plan withdrawals to 90 days so state rules align with federal notification timelines. The amendment also removed a specific CFR citation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee debates solvency guardrails and whether to move oversight of pooled-risk plans to insurance department

Committee backs modernization of continuing-care retirement community statute, requiring quarterly financial reporting and member protections

Committee reduces notice window for Medicare Advantage withdrawals to 90 days in amendment to SB121