Transcript Highlights:

• you know, 10 to 20 years, there's been a period of time where those individuals haven't had any increases
• I'm for it; I just don't see the $6 million, which is on the portal, as the increase in funding from
• This is a piece of legislation that rejects judicial salary increases. I yield to questions.
• Senate Bill 1156 proposes $65,333 for... to the pardon and parole board for compensation increases for
• So retirees have increasing expenditures just like everybody else.

Bills: SB1365, SB2139, SB1595, SB1303, SB2180, SB2072, SB1772, SB1209, SB137, SB1944, SB372, SB1636, SB1256, SB1827, SB2104, SB1226, SB1876, SB1966, SB80, SB1148, SB1147, SB1149, SB1161, SB1162, SB1164, SB1159, SB1165, SB1174, SB1156, SB1158, SB1163, SB1175, SB1176, SB1166, SB1167, SB1157, SB1146, SB1481, SB1144, SB1145, SCR20

Keywords: SB1365, Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act, procurement exemption, competitive bidding, state purchasing, Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department, tourism department, merchandise for resale, gift shops, lodges, golf pro shops, state parks, restaurant contracting, retail outlets, public procurement, purchasing flexibility, Title 74, emergency clause, restrictive covenants, discriminatory covenants

Transcript Highlights:

• And you'll see that premium increases, those annual premium increases have accelerated pretty significantly
• increases in premiums uh in APS and MCF.
• Is the annual premium increases that NMSA had projected before the session.
• in stabilizing premium increases over the next few years.
• or do you want the premium increase?

Transcript Highlights:

• premium increase in the individual premium increase in the individual market<00:01:33.040> so
• > from average premium saw 155% increase from average premium saw 155% increase from 2014<00:02:46.120
• c> the increase insurance premiums for the increase insurance premiums for the people<00:19:26.559
• <00:30:26.519> rather increases in taxes or in premiums rather increases in taxes or in premiums
• <00:52:14.839> increases making double digigit premium increases making double digigit premium

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard a reinsurance overview from Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer of the Minnesota Department of Commerce on the Minnesota Premium Security Plan. She explained that reinsurance helps stabilize premiums in the individual market by reimbursing insurers for high-cost claims, and said Minnesota’s program has lowered premiums, preserved carrier participation, and helped maintain consumer choice. She warned that without continued funding, the program would be depleted and individual-market premiums could rise by about 25%, with potential losses in coverage and access to care. She also described the program’s structure under a federal 1332 waiver, the role of MCHA in administering the program, and the state’s receipt of more than $650 million in federal pass-through funds to date. Dryer said the current program is funded through the end of 2025, though the federal waiver authority runs through 2027. The governor’s proposal would create a new assessment on insurers, estimated at roughly 2% to 3%, to fund the state share of the program and avoid another full waiver submission. She noted that the proposal assumes MinnesotaCare funding would be held harmless and that the program would be reduced if federal basic health plan funding were negatively affected. She also said projected costs changed because individual-market enrollment has grown and enhanced federal subsidies were removed from the estimate. Members raised concerns about the proposal’s impact on premiums and the history of the fund. Senator Rasmusson argued the new assessment amounts to a large tax increase on health insurance and questioned who would be assessed and whether the surcharge would be capped. Dryer responded that the assessment would be based on annual claims experience and market conditions, with final amounts determined at the end of each year, not monthly. Senator Duckworth and Senator Frentz supported reinsurance as a way to keep premiums lower, while also questioning how the program should be financed. Senator Green asked about the mechanics of the assessment and the role of the department in setting it, and Senator H questioned why the fiscal note assumed 12% annual growth for program costs when general premium growth was lower. No vote or formal action was taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Assuming just a 10% annual premium increase, a decade from now, the premium for the same plan will cost
• Assuming just a 10% annual premium Assuming just a 10% annual premium increase,<00:04:00.879>
• increase, a decade from now, the premium increase, a decade from now, the premium for<00:04:02.720
• a million dollar increase in the<00:18:09.760> premiums.
• <00:18:31.440> to premium increases from $15 million to premium increases from $15 million

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:08.360> in 61% making this the biggest increase in 61% making this the biggest increase
• <00:04:44.600> are companies companies whose premiums are companies companies whose premiums
• <00:05:04.280> the to be disproportionately increasing the to be disproportionately increasing
• <00:05:19.840> in of coverage also leads to increase in of coverage also leads to increase
• The program might drive up premiums for folks in the commercial market, two and a half cents is the increase

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And I take it that that is to pay the state employer's share of any increase in premiums for health benefits
• Can't we increase the premiums right now under the grandfather plan if we want to increase funds or at
• Can't we increase the premiums right now under the grandfather plan if we want to increase funds or at
• When we went through the proposal last time, Rebecca mentioned it was a 0.14% premium increase.
• That was a total premium increase from $686.8 million to $689 million.

Bills: SB2160

Keywords: health insurance, public employees, uniform group insurance, retirement, state employees, 908, all

Summary: The committee resumed work on Senate Bill 2160, which would move the Public Employees Retirement System health plan from grandfathered to non-grandfathered status under the Affordable Care Act. PERS officials Rebecca Frickie and Derek Holbein explained that the bill would allow more flexibility in plan design, including higher deductibles, co-pays, and out-of-pocket maximums, while also adding enhanced preventive benefits. They clarified that ACA “essential health benefits” apply to individual and small-group markets, not to PERS as a large employer, and that the bill’s projected cost increases were based on actuarial estimates and prior bid scenarios from Sanford and Blue Cross Blue Shield. Members debated whether the bill would actually save money or simply shift costs to employees. Supporters argued that non-grandfathered status would create more levers to manage medical inflation and could produce net premium savings through plan redesign, citing prior bid comparisons showing potential reductions of 1% to 8% depending on the option. Opponents, including Representative Schauer and North Dakota United president Nick Archelette, questioned how the state would pay for the estimated $25 million to $30 million in added benefits and warned that employees could face higher out-of-pocket costs amid already strained household budgets. Frickie said the legislature would control funding decisions and that current law requiring the state to pay full family premiums could be changed only by statute. The committee also discussed reserve funding, with members noting that a $4.3 million reserve draw in the bill was intended to cover the final months of the biennium and could be modified. After testimony and discussion, Vice Chair Johnson moved a do-pass recommendation and referral to Appropriations. The motion passed 10-3-1, with Representatives Ostlie, Schatz, and Schauer voting no. Representative Gump agreed to carry the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• :39.600> to The gross average premium saw a 155% increase from 2014 to 2017.
• If this funding expires, people will be facing again a 25% premium increase on top of normal cost increases
• And then one of the quick questions: what else has an influence on premium increases?
• <00:16:02.279> increases has an influence on uh premium increases has an influence on uh premium
• After just a few years of claim experience, we found that the premium impact drove huge premium increases

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• consumers will see steep premium increases in 2026.
• consumers will see steep premium increases in 2026.
• consumers will see steep premium increases in 2026.
• consumers will see steep premium increases in 2026.
• insurance premiums have substantially increased. increased. increased.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are making sure that premium increases for New Mexicans across the state don't break the bank.
• or $1,000 increase to their premiums; that assistance just continues seamlessly.
• Now, some of the plans did increase their premiums... Percent for next year. So that's part of it.
• Site itself that, you know, if you're a smoker, it can increase your premiums up to 50%.
• Speaker, gentlemen, that is a 36% cost increase on the average premium in the individual market.

Transcript Highlights:

• The tiered premiums in House Bill 121 are designed to increase as families become more economically self-sufficient
• Now, as income levels increase, so do their monthly premiums, and then the level of government subsidy
• monthly premiums.
• So as you can see, as family income moved up, the monthly premium contribution also correspondingly increased
• The monthly premium contribution also correspondingly increased.

Summary: The committee received a briefing from AHCA Deputy Secretary Brian Meyer and Florida Healthy Kids CMO Ashley Carr on implementation of HB 121, which was enacted in 2023 to expand Florida’s KidCare/CHIP eligibility from 200% to 300% of the federal poverty level and replace the sharp premium “benefits cliff” with a tiered premium glide path. Sponsor Rep. Bartleman described the bill as a bipartisan effort to help working families keep children insured while moving toward economic self-sufficiency. The presenters explained that the program remains a joint federal-state structure, with Medicaid unchanged and the bill affecting only the CHIP-related portions of KidCare. AHCA said implementation has been delayed by federal CMS actions. The agency reported that CMS first rejected a state plan amendment approach, then required revisions to the premium tiers under a new maintenance-of-effort interpretation, and later issued a new interpretation of continuous 12-month eligibility that would prevent disenrollment for nonpayment of premiums. AHCA said it submitted an 1115 waiver, but negotiations over special terms and conditions reached an impasse, and the state has filed litigation challenging CMS’s interpretation. Members asked about the cost of litigation, the effect on future bills, the review process for CMS documents, disenrollment and reenrollment rules, and whether any additional legislative action is needed; AHCA said no further state action is needed at this time and that the key issue is the pending federal litigation. Several members and the sponsor emphasized the need for immediate implementation and asked about possible interim relief. AHCA said current coverage remains in place under the preexisting program, that there is a 30-day grace period for premium payment, and that reenrollment does not require a penalty or back payment, though coverage is not active during lapsed periods. The committee also heard public comment from Nicholas Hessing of the Children’s Services Council of Broward County and the Florida Alliance of Children’s Councils and Trusts, who supported HB 121 and said the expansion could make about 17,600 additional children eligible in Broward County alone. The meeting ended with Rep. Bartleman thanking staff and expressing hope that the new federal administration would allow the program to move forward, and the chair adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• But just using that to show the impact of what those premium increases mean, we would see the funded
• And we would see a slight increase... actual impact of these premium changes. actual impact of these
• to show the impact of what those premium to show the impact of what those premium increases<00:27
• with the 18% increase in premium if we with the 18% increase in premium if we see<00:52:06.880><
• So, like I said, um, we've seen some significant increase in the premiums as a result of the Inflation

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:35 Attendance Roll Call: 00:00:55 Approval of Minutes: 00:02:56 Deferred Compensation Authority Update: 00:03:12 Retiree Health Update - TRS: 00:15:58 Retiree Health Update - KPPA: 00:56:13 Adjournment: 01:20:33, 958, all

Summary: The Public Pension Oversight Board received updates from the Kentucky Public Employees Deferred Compensation Authority and the Teachers Retirement System. Chris Biddle reported that deferred compensation assets had grown to about $4.787 billion with roughly 88,000 participants, crediting auto-enrollment, targeted marketing around pay raises, and retiree-focused services. He said the board’s self-directed brokerage account, authorized by last year’s legislation, is being designed around a $40,000 account-balance threshold with up to 25% transferable into the brokerage window, tentatively for July 1 of the coming year. He also described the free financial planning program, which has been used by about 3,300 to 3,500 participants with an 87% return rate, and noted that the plan is currently in a fee holiday; members asked about the fee structure and whether the CFP service is provided through Nationwide, which Biddle confirmed. Board members praised the deferred compensation program’s growth and asked for the legislation referenced by Biddle. He said the plan’s annual fees are capped, with a $1 monthly fee plus other charges up to a $225 cap, for a maximum of $237 per year absent a managed account. He also said the program is seeking unified payroll access to expand participation, especially among teachers, and that prior lineup changes saved about $6 million annually in participant fees. Bo Barnes of TRS then addressed retired teachers’ health insurance, first clarifying a prior question about declining federal contributions to the retirement annuity trust. He explained that federally funded school positions generated contributions that rose from $72 million in 2019 to $109 million in 2022, then fell to $85 million this year, with a projection of $80 million over the next three years; if those dollars do not come from federal sources, they would have to be replaced through the SEEK formula. Barnes then reviewed TRS health coverage, explaining that the statutory contract guarantees access to group coverage but not fixed premium levels, and that TRS administers two retiree plans: KEHP for retirees under 65 or otherwise not Medicare-eligible, and MEHP for retirees 65 and older or Medicare-eligible. Barnes said TRS completed RFPs for the 2026 plan year, retaining Express Scripts for prescription drugs and switching the Medicare Advantage medical provider from UnitedHealthcare to Humana, while keeping plan design, provider access, out-of-pocket costs, and benefits materially unchanged. He noted a modest hearing-aid improvement of $500 per ear beginning in 2026. He also reported that the TRS Board approved the maximum state contribution for KEHP at $1,044.96, up from $930.76, an 18% increase that he said would require about $15 million to $16 million more annually, while the MEHP premium would drop from $210 to $200 per month because of the new contract. Using the 2024 valuation, he said the KEHP increase would slightly reduce the health trust funded ratio from 80.4% to 80.1% and raise unfunded liability from $4.036 billion to $4.051 billion. Barnes closed by reviewing the 2010 shared-responsibility reforms that shifted retiree health costs away from a pay-as-you-go model, including phased employee and district contributions and Commonwealth stabilization funding. No votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• were getting headline-making double-digit premium increases.
• /c><00:43:45.359> premium drove huge premium drove huge premium increases,<00:43:47.280> carriers
• making double-digit premium increases. making double-digit premium increases.
• <01:27:18.080> increase<01:27:18.400> as likely get a 25% premium increase as likely
• <01:36:52.960> increase<01:36:53.679> as of um lessening of a premium increase as of

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Andre, you know, anywhere from 20 to 36% increases in premiums because that was what the savings were
• Andre, you know, anywhere from 20 to 36% increases in premiums because that was what the savings were
• Andre, you know, anywhere from 20 to 36% increases in premiums because that was what the savings were
• Andre, you know, anywhere from 20 to 36% increases in premiums because that was what the savings were
• So, yes, there is going to be an increase in premiums because the federal tax credits are there, and

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3388, and an A1 amendment was adopted by voice vote. The bill, as amended, would direct the Department of Commerce to seek another federal waiver to continue Minnesota’s reinsurance program and preserve the assessment-and-tax-credit funding model adopted last session. Chair O’Driscoll said the measure is intended to give future legislators options before the current reinsurance structure ends, warning that without it individual-market premiums could rise substantially and more people could lose coverage. Testimony was largely supportive. Dan Andre of the Minnesota Council of Health Plans said reinsurance has been a success since 2018, has lowered premiums by covering a portion of high-cost claims, and helped subsidize care for more than 5,000 Minnesotans in 2024. Ann New Brindley of the Minnesota Business Partnership and Steven Rubis of the Health Plan Partnership of Minnesota also backed the bill, saying market stability is important amid the loss of federal premium tax credits and that continued reinsurance would help prevent further premium increases and cost shifting. Jonathan Carter of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce likewise supported the bill, citing the program’s role in keeping Minnesota’s individual-market premiums among the lowest in the country. Members also discussed how the assessment and tax-credit mechanism works, with Chair O’Driscoll describing it as an assessment on plans followed by a tax credit against state liability. Representative Elkins questioned how insurers self-assess, and Representative Smith said the assessment model is preferable to a general-fund approach if the program continues. Representative Kaggel raised concerns about taxpayer costs and the broader health care system, while also saying the current system is unsustainable and in need of more fundamental change. The committee then renewed the motion to lay House File 3388, as amended, over for possible inclusion in an omnibus bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• So 14% is a very large number in terms of premium increases.
• West Virginia is seeing those premium increases mitigated up to 14%.
• <00:22:30.480> increases<00:22:31.039> across lowering premium increases across lowering
• number um in terms of of Premium number um in terms of of Premium increases<00:22:41.039> West
• premiums mitigate those seeing those premiums mitigate those premium<00:22:45.559> increases<

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:10 SB145 Discussion: 02:23 SB145 Vote: 05:13 SB183 Discussion: 06:13 SB183 Vote: 11:37 HB413 Discussion Only: 16:15, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum and first took up Senate Bill 145, sponsored by Sen. David Givens. The bill would update retail installment contract statutes for automobile sales, allowing retailers with installment contracts shorter than 28 days to begin collections after three days instead of waiting for multiple missed payments, and it also harmonizes a related dollar amount in statute from $10 to $15. The committee asked no questions, and the bill received a favorable expression on a roll-call vote. The committee then heard Senate Bill 183 from Sen. Matt Nunn, with testimony from Chris Nolan of the American Property Casualty Insurance Association. The bill would require proxy advisers acting for the State Retirement System to act solely in the financial interest of current and future retirees and to avoid political or social considerations in shareholder voting recommendations. Supporters argued it would keep politics out of public pensions and align proxy advice with fiduciary duties; members praised the bill and noted Kentucky could be among the first states to adopt such a model. The committee approved the bill with favorable expression after a roll-call vote. The committee also reviewed administrative regulation 808 KAR 9:10 from the Department of Financial Institutions, with no vote required. It then took up House Bill 413, a PBM rebate pass-through bill, with testimony from Sarah Wood of the Diabetes Patient Advocacy Coalition. She said the bill would require 85% of negotiated drug rebates to be passed through to patients at the point of sale, lowering out-of-pocket costs, especially for high-rebate drugs such as insulin, while still allowing 15% to remain with plans. She cited examples from other states and argued the bill would benefit about 650,000 Kentuckians. Hope McClaflin of Anthem opposed the bill, saying it would reduce employers’ ability to use rebates to lower premiums, could disproportionately favor high-cost brand-name drug users, and could create significant costs for state and fully insured plans. Members asked questions about other states’ pass-through rates and the effect on premiums, but no final action on House Bill 413 was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Family size: if you're covering a spouse or dependents, it's probably going to increase your premium.
• The blue is how much we've seen premiums increase over the past 10 years.
• So how has HR1 then impacted the rate of premium increase for small groups, or has it?
• I mean, as the number of people drop out of the private market and it increases the premium pay, we all
• ... ...drop out of the private market and it increases the premium pay.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing focused first on Oregon Medicaid coordinated care organization (CCO) finances and rate setting. Oregon Health Authority staff explained how 2025 CCO financial results will inform 2027 capitation rates, including reserve requirements, subcapitation arrangements, and major cost drivers such as behavioral health, pharmacy, rural hospital costs, and dental directed payments. They said the Legislature’s added 2025 funding materially improved CCO margins and that, without it, the program would have been negative overall. Members asked about retained earnings, subcapitation, behavioral health utilization, ABA therapy, and whether outcomes are being evaluated; OHA said rate setting is actuarial and that CCOs, OHA, and other partners all play roles in monitoring efficacy and access. OHA also reviewed House Bill 4039 changes intended to increase transparency and give CCOs earlier access to rate information and reconciliation exhibits. CCO representatives then testified that the system is under significant financial pressure and that behavioral health state-directed payments, benefit changes, and federal uncertainty from H.R. 1 are reducing flexibility. CareOregon said it has lost more than $500 million over the last couple of years and is now making provider terminations and other network changes to align spending with available funding, while emphasizing that CCOs must make hard decisions about which services and providers can be sustained. Eastern Oregon CCO said rural and frontier factors, cost-based hospitals, air ambulance needs, and statewide efficiency adjustments are not fully reflected in rates, and that dental funding is especially strained. Trillium similarly warned that state-directed payments and benefit expansion pressures are constraining the global budget model and that H.R. 1 could worsen acuity and volatility. Members pressed the witnesses on who is responsible for evaluating treatment effectiveness, especially for ABA and psychotherapy, and on how utilization limits and reimbursement changes are being used to control costs. The committee then shifted to an overview of the Affordable Care Act and Oregon’s commercial insurance market. Department of Consumer and Business Services staff explained actuarial value, metal tiers, premium tax credits, medical loss ratio rules, and the main drivers of premium rates: cost trend, utilization trend, and administrative costs. They said mandates have likely added only a limited amount to premiums over the past decade, though the exact effect is difficult to isolate, and they gave examples of how high-cost, low-volume services versus broad, high-utilization services can affect rates differently. Staff also noted that Providence Health Plan and PacificSource Health Plans are withdrawing from the individual market, though consumers should still have at least three insurer options in every county and may have four in many counties. The division said it is in the middle of reviewing proposed 2027 rates and will continue its public rate review process, including hearings and written comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so for that region it increased premiums; so that's Region 15, increased premiums that year by 3.5%
• Texas small employer premiums, 15% to 20% premium increases annually.
• So they're very sensitive to any type of premium increase.
• So those folks may see some type of increase in their premiums.
• So those folks may see some type of increase in their premiums.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > we have to increase whole premiums or we have to increase whole premiums or we wouldn't<00:48:49.760
• entire plan will likely increase entire plan will likely increase premiums<01:05:10.000> for<
• You know, 15% of our population is going to have increased premiums of, let's say, 20% or whatever it
• So you're trading off, uh, what's probably a very small increase in premium for a huge impact on the
• You know, 15% of our population is going to have increased premiums of, let's say, 20% or whatever it

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Premiums were increasing over 50%.
• Premiums were increasing over 50%.
• Premiums were increasing over 50%.
• were not increasing could and premiums were not increasing like<00:57:42.280> we're<00:57:42.400
• 26.960> year to in- the premium increases this year to in- the premium increases this year is<

Bills: HF3766, HF3972, HF3437, HF4118

Keywords: travel insurance, regulation, insurance licensing, consumer protection, travel assistance, short-term rental, vacation rental, home sharing, rental marketplace, online platform, property damage guarantee, damage waiver, reimbursement insurance, insurance regulation, commerce department, platform user, Airbnb, Vrbo, host protection, rental home marketplace

Transcript Highlights:

• To understand why premiums are increasing, it's critical to understand how we develop them.
• The plan will be in a premium. The plan is required to allow it, which increases the price.
• They can and do increase their premiums.
• That's why we have seen such a significant... ...and do increase their premiums.
• Cost areas for premiums and fairly consistently get lower premium increases.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We go to the next slide, medical malpractice rate increases and premium comparisons.
• As Alice said, the premiums have been increasing significantly. There was that big jump.
• So, why this huge increase in premiums?
• are trying to increase their premiums at least at the rate at which claims are being paid.
• Making our premiums increase because they are one bad actor? Mr.