Hawaii Senate Bill SCR190

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/16/26
• Refer: 3/19/26

Caption

Requesting The Auditor To Assess The Social And Financial Effects Of Requiring Health Insurers To Provide Coverage For Medically Necessary Proton Beam Therapy For Cancer Treatment.

Summary

SCR190 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution requesting the Hawaii State Auditor to prepare an impact assessment report on a proposed health insurance mandate for medically necessary proton beam therapy for cancer treatment. The resolution ties the request to House Bill No. 2145, which would require commercial health insurers, mutual benefit societies, and health maintenance organizations to cover proton beam therapy when medically necessary and would bar insurers from applying stricter clinical evidence standards to that therapy than to other radiation treatments. The resolution does not itself create the insurance mandate. Instead, it triggers the statutory process under sections 23-51 and 23-52, Hawaii Revised Statutes, which requires an auditor’s report on the social and financial effects of proposed mandated health coverage before the Legislature can act on such a measure. The Auditor is directed to assess the likely effects of the proposed coverage and submit findings, recommendations, and any proposed legislation to the Legislature by twenty days before the 2027 Regular Session.

Impact

SCR190 would not directly amend insurance law or require coverage on its own; its legal effect is procedural. It initiates the mandatory legislative review process for a proposed health insurance benefit mandate, specifically for proton beam therapy, and asks the Auditor to evaluate the social and financial consequences of that mandate for insurers, health plans, and patients. The resolution is linked to a proposed effective date in HB 2145 of January 1, 2027, but any substantive change to coverage would come from that separate bill or later legislation.

Sentiment

The bill text reflects generally supportive sentiment toward expanding access to cancer treatment. The findings emphasize that proton beam therapy can reduce radiation exposure to healthy tissue, may be medically necessary for certain patients, and could improve outcomes and quality of life. Because the available context includes no committee testimony or recorded votes, there is no evidence of formal opposition or divided sentiment in the legislative record provided.

Contention

The main policy issue is whether insurers should be required to cover proton beam therapy and, if so, under what medical-necessity and utilization criteria. The resolution itself does not resolve those questions; it asks for an evidence-based fiscal and social analysis before the Legislature considers the mandate. Potential points of contention likely include the cost of coverage for insurers and consumers, the strength of clinical evidence supporting proton beam therapy compared with other radiation treatments, and whether coverage standards should be limited to specific cancers or patient populations. No specific opposing viewpoints are included in the provided transcripts or votes.