HRT insurance mandate fails in committee after debate on premiums and actuarial review

Representative Kelty introduced HB 26‑11‑22 to require Colorado‑regulated health plans to cover medically necessary hormone replacement therapy for perimenopause and menopause. The sponsor framed the bill as an equity and preventive‑care measure, citing testimony from clinicians who said HRT can reduce long‑term risks such as osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease.

Kevin McFatridge of the Colorado Association of Health Plans said plans support patient access to appropriate HRT but cautioned against a broad mandate to cover every FDA‑approved product without an independent review of clinical evidence and premium impacts; he urged use of the Senate Bill 40 (SB40) review process. Legislative Council fiscal staff told the committee the first‑year impact is effectively de minimis but noted a potential fiscal impact up to roughly $70,000 in the second year (per the fiscal note section), and that actuary input through SB40 would provide a fuller premium estimate.

Sponsors offered strike‑below and technical amendments (L001, L002), including Medicaid‑related clarifications and a federal‑match carve‑out to avoid obligating the state if federal matching funds were unavailable. Health‑plan representatives asked for narrower language that would preserve prior authorization and utilization tools and avoid mandating every formulation. Committee members raised questions about ERISA‑governed employer plans (which state law cannot bind), the absence of a completed actuarial SB40 review for the bill and potential premium effects.

On a recorded roll call the committee voted to advance the bill to the Committee of the Whole but the motion failed on a 2–11 vote. Sponsors then moved to postpone the bill indefinitely; that motion passed with no objection, effectively ending further consideration in this committee.