Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House amends mental-health parity bill and refers it to rules for a new fiscal note amid business and state-plan concerns
Summary
Representative Judy Ann Buckmire's HB 159, which would require parity in mental health coverage for state-regulated health plans, was amended on the floor to include state employee health care plans 'by contract' and then referred to the Rules Committee for a new fiscal note after extensive debate over cost and coverage scope.
The Utah House debated House Bill 159, a measure to require parity for mental-health coverage in health insurance policies subject to state law. Sponsor Representative Buckmire framed the bill as a catalyst to bring insurers, employers and consumers together to negotiate a Utah-specific approach, citing studies and pilot evidence that parity can be implemented with modest premium effects and important social benefits.
Buckmire said the bill covers plans governed by state insurance law (not ERISA-covered large employers) and noted prior analyses that found modest premium increases in markets with managed care. "The purpose of this bill is to be the impetus to bring this group together," Buckmire said, urging colleagues to consider parity as both a moral and economic imperative.
Floor debate focused on coverage scope and fiscal impact. Representative Harper moved to amend HB 159 so it also "applies to state employee health care plans, by contract," arguing the state should lead by example; the House adopted that amendment. Opponents and members concerned about cost, including small-business members, urged a fuller fiscal accounting and a new fiscal note given the amendment and potential impacts on employers, school districts and local governments.
Representative Hickman moved to send the bill back to the Rules Committee for a new fiscal note. Supporters of the referral sought a comprehensive fiscal estimate that would include current state spending on mental-health services as an offset and the likely effects on private premiums; opponents warned the step could delay action for individuals needing coverage. The House voted to refer HB 159 to Rules pending a new fiscal note; the clerk recorded the referral vote as 39 yes and 35 no.
Because the bill was sent to Rules for a fiscal update, further action will depend on the committee’s analysis and any technical revisions recommended before the bill can return to the floor.
