Insurance: health insurers; prior authorization for certain opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder medications; prohibit. Amends 1956 PA 218 (MCL 500.100 - 500.8302) by adding sec. 3406ww.
Summary
Senate Bill 400 would amend Michigan’s Insurance Code to prohibit health insurers from requiring prior authorization for medications used to treat opioid use disorder or alcohol use disorder. The bill applies to insurers that deliver, issue for delivery, or renew health insurance policies in Michigan, and it incorporates the existing statutory definition of “prior authorization” from section 2212e.
In practical terms, the bill is intended to make it easier and faster for patients to access medications used in addiction treatment by removing an administrative approval step that can delay care. It focuses specifically on medications for opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder, rather than broadly changing prior authorization rules for all prescription drugs or all behavioral health services.
Impact
The bill would add a new section, 3406ww, to the Michigan Insurance Code and create a specific coverage rule for health insurers operating in the state. It would limit insurers’ ability to impose prior authorization requirements on medications for opioid and alcohol use disorder treatment, thereby affecting insurer utilization management practices and potentially improving access to medication-assisted treatment and related recovery care for insured patients.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests strong bipartisan or at least broad legislative support, with the bill reported favorably out of committee by a 10-0 vote and then passing the Senate 36-0. No committee transcript is available here, but the unanimous votes indicate little visible opposition in the recorded legislative process. Overall, the bill appears to have been viewed positively as a targeted access-to-care measure.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials, and the recorded votes show no opposition. In general, bills like this can raise concerns from insurers about reduced utilization controls and from policymakers about balancing access with cost management, but those concerns are not reflected in the available transcripts or vote totals. The bill’s narrow scope may have helped limit controversy by focusing only on addiction-treatment medications rather than broader insurance prior authorization policy.