Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medicare Supplement Medigap topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears competing estimates on Medigap changes; bill to repeal 2023 reforms laid over
Summary
Senate File 2,498, which would repeal 2023 changes to Minnesota’s Medicare supplement (Medigap) rules, drew competing testimony on premium impacts. Insurers warned of steep rate increases if the 2023 law remains; patient and advocacy groups urged protections for those with preexisting conditions. The committee laid the bill over for further work.
Senate File 2,498, a proposal to repeal 2023 statutory changes affecting Medicare supplement insurance, drew extended testimony on the trade-offs between price stability and access for beneficiaries with preexisting conditions.
Senator Draheim, the bill’s chief sponsor, told the Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection that hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans rely on supplemental Medicare plans and that the sponsor seeks to ensure long-term affordability for seniors on fixed incomes. "These people on fixed incomes can take advantage of these plans," he said when introducing the measure and turning the hearing to testifiers.
Seamus Dolan, director of government relations for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, urged repeal, saying the 2023 law set to take effect would make Minnesota an outlier and could drive dramatic premium increases. Based on Blue Cross’s internal data, Dolan said company actuaries projected a 90% premium increase for Medigap plans by the fifth year under the 2023 law. "The only viable solution is a repeal," he told the committee.
State Department of Commerce analysis, cited by department witnesses at a later Commerce bill hearing the same day, provided a substantially lower estimate: an initial 6% increase in the first year and about 16% over current rates by 2030 under the 2023 law. Advocacy groups and patient organizations urged caution about repeal. Dana Bacon of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society said people with prior cancer diagnoses and other serious conditions face barriers to getting Medigap coverage today and that policy changes should preserve the ability of patients to access comprehensive care without narrow networks or onerous prior authorization.
Rich Neumeister, who described himself as a Medicare supplement enrollee, urged protections for seniors with preexisting conditions and proposed policy options the committee could consider, including limiting underwriting on common conditions, targeted subsidies or a high-risk reinsurance pool to soften premium impacts for vulnerable enrollees.
Committee discussion focused on reconciling competing cost estimates and the trade-offs between access and market stability. Senators asked questions about the discrepancy between insurer projections and the Department of Commerce study, and whether options such as late-enrollment penalties or financial assistance could smooth the transition.
At the close of the hearing the committee laid Senate File 2,498 over for further consideration; no final committee recommendation to pass or refer was recorded in the transcript.
