Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Insurance Chronic Pain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances amendment to expand access to nonopioid chronic‑pain therapies
Summary
A House committee favorably straw‑voted an amendment (290H) aiming to improve access to nonopioid chronic‑pain therapies by limiting payer barriers; the change adapts language used successfully in Maine and Massachusetts after stakeholders raised cost and feasibility concerns for a fuller mandate.
A state House committee on Thursday gave a favorable straw vote to amendment 290H, an insurance measure that would ease insurer barriers to nonopioid treatments for chronic pain while avoiding a broad coverage mandate that the state could not fund.
The amendment mirrors language used in Maine and Massachusetts and was developed after stakeholder meetings this summer, sponsors said. Cindy Steinberg, a member of a federal HHS pain‑treatment commission and a contributor to similar laws elsewhere, joined the process as a stakeholder.
Why it matters: backers said federal and national panels identified limited access to nonopioid therapies as a major contributor to the opioid epidemic and urged states to expand coverage. Sponsors narrowed the original proposal after finding a full insurance mandate would create costs the state could not absorb.
Committee discussion and details: supporters described the amendment as a compromise approach that preserves insurer discretion while reducing administrative barriers such as prior authorization and “step therapy.” The draft requires that any documentation or evidence standards applied to nonallopathic therapies — for example behavioral therapy, chiropractic care or acupuncture — not be more restrictive than those applied to conventional (allopathic) treatments or to opioid therapies, a change intended to prevent asymmetrical evidence standards from blocking access.
Stakeholders attending the hearing included representatives from the insurance department and consumer advocates; Cindy Steinberg was cited as advising the committee based on work in other states. A committee member, Dave Nagle (Belknap County District 6), said, “I like it,” when asked whether he supported the amendment.
Disposition: the committee took a straw vote in favor of moving the amendment forward.
What this does not do: the committee did not adopt a full, statewide insurance mandate requiring coverage of all nonopioid therapies; sponsors said they intentionally avoided a state cost obligation and instead adapted a model that has worked in other states.
