Bill would let Washington Health Benefit Exchange set market‑factor certification criteria; insurers warn of unintended consequences

House Bill 2564, "Safeguarding Access and Affordability for Exchange Customers," was the other major bill the committee heard Jan. 28. Kim Weidner (staff) and later Ingrid Ulrey, CEO of the Washington Health Benefit Exchange, outlined the proposal which would let the exchange annually review market conditions and adopt market‑factor certification criteria to address county‑level access and affordability shortfalls.

"This bill will enable our bipartisan board of directors to establish new access and affordability criteria, assess market conditions each year, and then apply one or more of these criteria as needed," said Ingrid Ulrey, noting the change is intended to respond to federal policy shifts — including HR1 and the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits — that have driven premium increases and enrollment declines. Ulrey said two concrete possible uses for plan year 2027 would be requiring carriers to offer plans in underserved counties and ensuring availability of lower‑cost bronze plans.

Supporters included former state senator Karen Keiser (HBE board member), consumer advocates and regional navigators who said simplified choices and guaranteed plan types would help retain enrollment and stabilize markets. "We need to work to ensure Washingtonians have lower premium plans, specifically bronze plans available," said John Chapman, an HBE board member who testified in support.

Insurers, provider systems and trade groups strongly opposed the bill as written. David Foster of the Association of Washington Healthcare Plans argued the proposal "would significantly expand the exchange authority without clear standards, limits, or accountability mechanisms to protect market stability," warning forced participation could give consolidated providers excessive leverage and push premiums up. Carrie Tellefson (Regence/Regents Blue Shield) and Christine Brewer (Premera Blue Cross) described provider consolidation in some counties (notably San Juan) that makes offering affordable plans difficult and urged solutions that address provider contracting rather than mandating carrier participation.

The Office of the Insurance Commissioner (OIC) testified "pro, with amendment," requesting changes to timing and confidentiality so that the exchange would not receive rate information before carriers file rates with the OIC in May and to preserve statutory confidentiality timelines. Hospitals and producer associations also requested targeted amendments (for example, removing the word "directly" from a prohibition on imposing network participation or reimbursement limits) to avoid unintended effects.

Consumer witnesses described steep premiums and out‑of‑pocket costs. "At $2,651 a month, it was the most inexpensive plan," said Ed Trevaglia, a consumer who testified supportively and described paying more than $31,000 a year in premiums plus large out‑of‑pocket costs.

Supporters and opponents said they wanted to work with the sponsor and the exchange to refine language. The committee closed the public testimony and moved the package of bills and amendments into executive session; the record shows subsequent committee action on several bills during that session.