Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee split on bill requiring state to pay new insurance benefit mandates
Summary
House File 400, a proposal to require the state to fund any new mandated health insurance benefits so mandates don’t raise premiums, failed to advance despite a 10–9 committee vote in favor because a cross‑caucus rule required a different threshold. Supporters said it would curb unfunded mandates; opponents called it a taxpayer subsidy to insurers.
Representative Perry presented House File 400, a bill that would require the state to pay the cost of newly enacted health insurance benefit mandates so they do not increase premiums for purchasers. The author framed the measure as a restraint on adding unfunded mandates and said it would protect employers, employees and seniors from premium increases tied to new legislative mandates.
Members engaged in detailed debate. Supporters said the bill would preserve access by preventing new mandates from raising premiums; critics argued it merely pumps taxpayer dollars into insurers without evidence of return on investment and suggested alternative approaches or awaiting further study. Several members asked whether the bill should require additional reporting from insurers about long‑term cost offsets from preventive benefits.
A roll-call was requested. The committee’s simple tally was 10–9 in favor, but under a joint rule requiring cross‑caucus support that effectively needed 11 votes including at least one from the opposite caucus, the motion did not prevail and HF 400 did not move on to Ways and Means.
