To enact section 3901.96 of the Revised Code to exclude nonprofit agricultural membership organizations from insurance regulations.
Summary
SB100 creates a new section of the Ohio Revised Code that exempts certain nonprofit agricultural membership organizations from the state’s insurance laws. The bill applies only to organizations, or their affiliates, that were incorporated in Ohio on or before December 31, 1919, were formed to promote the interests of farmers, and provide healthcare benefit coverage only to members and their families under written contracts. For qualifying organizations, the coverage they provide is not treated as insurance under Ohio law.
The bill also requires that applications and member contracts clearly state that the coverage is not insurance and is not subject to Ohio insurance statutes and rules. In addition, these organizations are prohibited from describing the coverage as insurance in marketing materials. The bill allows the risks associated with this coverage to be assumed or reinsured by an insurer authorized in Ohio.
Impact
SB100 narrows the reach of Title XXXIX and Chapters 1739, 1751, and 1753 of the Revised Code by carving out a specific class of nonprofit agricultural membership organizations from insurance regulation. It changes the legal status of qualifying healthcare benefit coverage by excluding it from the definition and oversight of insurance under state law, while imposing disclosure and marketing restrictions on the organizations that use this exemption. The practical effect is to preserve a special regulatory treatment for a small, historically established farm-membership-based coverage model and to affect the organizations, their members, and any insurers that may reinsure the coverage.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and moved through both chambers with strong favorable votes. The Senate passed it unanimously after committee approval, and the House committee and full House also advanced it by wide margins, with only a small number of dissenting votes. The voting history suggests the measure was generally viewed as a targeted, noncontroversial clarification or exemption rather than a major policy overhaul.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the bill’s decision to exempt a narrowly defined class of organizations from the state’s insurance framework, which could be seen as creating a special carveout from consumer-protection and regulatory requirements. Any concern would likely center on whether members receive sufficient disclosure that the coverage is not insurance, whether the exemption could reduce oversight, and whether the historical cutoff and organizational criteria are too restrictive or preferential. The bill’s supporters appear to favor preserving this longstanding coverage model for farm-related nonprofit organizations, while any opposition likely focused on the regulatory exemption itself rather than the organizations’ eligibility criteria.