AN ACT to amend and reenact section 26.1-36.7-08 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to requirements for reinsurance association of North Dakota claims; and to declare an emergency.
Summary
SB 2091 amends North Dakota law governing the Reinsurance Association of North Dakota’s handling of claims for nongrandfathered individual health benefit plans. For claims incurred per plan year that total at least $100,000 and not more than $1 million, the bill requires a member insurer to be reinsured by the association for up to 75% of the insurer’s responsibility for those claims, subject to the terms of the plan. The bill also directs the association’s board to set the annual attachment points and coinsurance percentage for each plan year by April 1 of the preceding year.
The bill is framed as an emergency measure, meaning it takes effect immediately upon enactment rather than waiting for the normal effective date. It is a targeted technical change to the state’s reinsurance framework, affecting insurers that participate in the individual health insurance market and the association that helps spread high-cost claims risk across the market.
Impact
SB 2091 amends section 26.1-36.7-08 of the North Dakota Century Code, updating the statutory requirements for reinsurance of high-cost claims in the individual health insurance market. The practical effect is to preserve and clarify the mechanism by which the Reinsurance Association of North Dakota reimburses member insurers for a portion of claims in a specified cost band, while giving the board explicit annual authority to set attachment points and coinsurance percentages. This affects insurers, the reinsurance association, and indirectly consumers in the nongrandfathered individual market through potential premium stabilization and risk-spreading.
Sentiment
The available voting record suggests broad bipartisan support for the bill. It passed the Senate 46-1 and the House 87-5, indicating that most legislators viewed it favorably. The absence of committee transcript discussion suggests there was little recorded public controversy in the materials provided, and the emergency designation appears to have been accepted as part of the bill’s implementation.
Contention
No committee testimony or floor debate is provided, so specific objections are not documented in the record supplied. The only visible point of possible contention is the bill’s adjustment of reinsurance parameters and the board’s authority to set annual attachment points and coinsurance percentages, which could matter to insurers and policymakers concerned about premium impacts, market stability, or the scope of the association’s obligations. However, the lopsided votes indicate that any disagreement was limited.