Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arizona committee opens stakeholder process on proposed caps for surprise-billing arbitration
Summary
Committee held discussion-only on a Livingston amendment to HB2211 that would cap Independent Dispute Resolution offers at 300% of Medicare or the QPA and make excessive offers unprofessional conduct; provider groups urged more stakeholder meetings while insurers pressed for limits to curb a small number of high-billing practices.
The Arizona House Appropriations Committee set aside a vote and opened extended stakeholder talks on a proposed amendment to House Bill 2211 that would deem it unprofessional conduct for certain licensed providers to submit Independent Dispute Resolution (IDR) offers above 300% of Medicare or 300% of the Qualified Payment Amount (QPA).
Staff summarized the Livingston ‘strike everything’ amendment as targeting outlier IDR offers. Christina Corriere, testifying on behalf of ARMA, said the amendment appears to reflect insurers’ concerns while overlooking providers’ experiences, such as opaque QPA setting and specialties whose typical rates exceed the proposed Medicare-based cap. “This bill reflects only the concerns from insurers,” Corriere said, and she urged a broader stakeholder process to address negotiation and transparency issues.
Mark Osborne, speaking for Blue Cross Blue Shield, said a concentrated group of private-equity–backed provider firms accounts for a disproportionate share of IDR filings and is driving up state costs. Osborne told the committee he believes targeted caps would reduce abusive offers and cited an estimated $3 million annual impact on state health plans from surprise billing. He urged further work but said urgency is growing as arbitration offers sometimes reach multiples far higher than Medicare rates.
Committee members pressed both sides on enforcement mechanisms and potential collateral effects. Some members worried a licensure penalty is an extreme remedy for what they described as a billing dispute; others said existing regulatory tools, including bad-faith insurance practices statutes, can be costly and slow to fix systemic problems. The chair said he will hold additional stakeholder meetings—possibly an ad hoc workgroup—before bringing any revised amendment back to the committee.
No formal motion or vote on HB2211 was taken at the hearing; the chair said he intends to convene broader stakeholder sessions before any floor action.
