Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medicaid Nemt topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would streamline Medicaid NEMT approvals by starting with DHHS vetting
Summary
LB1180 proposes that carriers seeking to provide Medicaid nonemergency medical transportation (NEMT) begin with Department of Health and Human Services vetting, then receive final licensing from the Public Service Commission — removing the PSC certificate‑of‑necessity hearing that can block market entry. PSC and DHHS supported the change; Uber testified neutral and supportive of simplification with clarifying language.
Sen. Wendy DeBoer told the committee LB1180 aims to reduce duplicative regulation and speed access to nonemergency medical transportation (NEMT) for Medicaid beneficiaries by shifting the initial approval step to the Department of Health and Human Services. Under the proposal, a carrier that meets DHHS standards would be forwarded to the Public Service Commission for final licensing rather than undergoing a PSC public‑need hearing that can be used by incumbents to contest new entrants.
Tim Schram, chair of the Public Service Commission, said the change aligns with prior modernization steps in other carrier types and reduces regulatory burden while preserving safety oversight (insurance, inspections). Matthew Ahern, deputy director of Medicaid and Long‑Term Care at DHHS, said the bill creates a beneficiary‑centered improvement: DHHS can perform the more intensive vetting specific to NEMT services and thus expand provider participation without compromising background checks and contractual monitoring.
Kristen Hassebrooke of Uber testified neutral, praising streamlining efforts and noting Uber's NEMT participation in other states; she urged language clarifications to ensure TNCs remain subject to their existing TNC requirements while participating in Medicaid programs. Committee members sought details about fee structures, whether PSC would continue to issue licenses (sponsors: yes, fee unchanged), and asked for data on how many providers and trips would be affected; sponsors agreed to follow up with numbers.
Lawmakers discussed the policy tradeoff of removing the certificate‑of‑necessity hearing — proponents called it anti‑competitive protectionism that inflates costs, while some members asked for assurances that PSC would still check licensing prerequisites. The hearing concluded with the committee taking the bill under consideration.
