Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare Exchange topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to repeal prohibition on state insurance exchange; proponents cite potential savings
Summary
Representative Knight presented HB 3,136 to repeal Missouri27s statutory prohibition on creating a state-based health insurance marketplace; testimony from Greg Conley (Get Insured) cited examples from Georgia and an estimated $70 million currently sent to the federal exchange.
Representative Knight opened the public hearing on House Bill 3,136, which would remove a 2012 statutory prohibition on establishing a state-based health insurance exchange.
Proponent Greg Conley, of the company Get Insured, told the committee that Georgia27s experience in standing up a state exchange produced sizable fiscal and consumer benefits; he said Missouri currently sends about $70,000,000 to the federal exchange and that a state-based marketplace could recapture fees and provide more flexible plan design. "Currently, Missouri sends about $70,000,000 to the federal government being part of the federal exchange," Conley said.
Committee members probed implementation details and regulatory control. Representative Mayhew voiced concern about delegating too much authority to the executive branch and asked who would create the technical specifications and governance structure; Conley said the bill sets up the conversation and that bids and technology choices would follow. Representative Davis raised the 2012 voter-approved Proposition E and framed the committee vote as revisiting a prior voter decision; Conley said he was not from Missouri and deferred to members on that political question.
Members also asked whether state action would alter consumer costs or plan availability. Conley said the underlying cost of health care would not be changed solely by moving administration in-state, but argued that a state exchange could attract insurers and increase plan options, particularly in rural areas.
No committee vote on HB 3,136 was taken in this hearing; the public testimony concluded with proponents and members expressing a mix of support, questions about regulatory authority, and requests for more implementation detail.
What comes next: Committee members asked for additional detail on governance and technology; proponents emphasized potential savings and market flexibility but did not present a formal state fiscal estimate during the hearing.
