Video & Transcript : 'clean claim' :
Page 231 of 500
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- And I intend to do as much in that regard as I can. to clean up our own messes and I intend to do as
- My overture to you is that there are ways for our branch internally to clean up some of its problems
- Our office performs an accounting function for the state by paying the expenditures and claims related
- Additionally, five full-time equivalents (FTEs) would be funded, including one to help counties claim
- We represent death-sentenced persons and mandate post-conviction proceedings on constitutional claims
Bills:
SB 1
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Committee Aug 13th, 2026 at 09:30 am
Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- They claim the company representatives are lying.
- People make the false claims that the data centers will raise your electrical rates.
- Some still claim they will drain lakes of coquia.
- And in the case of Mandan, they're claiming that we're going to drain and pollute the Missouri River.
- And in the case of Mandan, they're claiming that we're going to drain and pollute the Missouri River.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity
Transcript Highlights:
- I do not claim that a bill is perfect; nothing is perfect.
- But the benefits to the people of Massachusetts and to the country, like clean air and water, are more
- would be created by a private right of action that could result in multiple violations, multiple claims
- One, the telematics, the quote-unquote black box data, can be very helpful in a lot of claims disputes
- There is some importance to this data for claims investigations. Thank you.
Summary:
The committee hearing focused on a package of Massachusetts privacy and technology bills, especially measures to ban the sale of location data, establish a comprehensive consumer data privacy law, and regulate biometric recognition and surveillance pricing. Chairs and sponsors argued that self-regulation has failed, that data brokers and large tech companies routinely collect and monetize sensitive information, and that state action is needed because federal protections are weak or absent. Several speakers tied the bills to reproductive health, gender-affirming care, domestic violence, children’s data, and other sensitive uses of location and biometric information.
Supporters included legislators and advocates who backed H. 86/S. 197 (Location Shield), H. 78/S. 45/H. 104/S. 29 (comprehensive privacy bills), H. 99/S. 47 (surveillance pricing in grocery stores), and H. 36/S. 36 (biometric recognition accountability). They emphasized data minimization, bans on selling sensitive data, consumer rights to access, delete, and opt out, and in some cases a private right of action. Several witnesses said Massachusetts should lead or align with other states, while others argued that stronger protections are needed because data can be weaponized by stalkers, anti-abortion actors, abusive partners, insurers, or law enforcement.
Industry and coalition witnesses urged the committee to favor a more standardized, interoperable framework modeled on laws already adopted in other states, warning that novel definitions, data-minimization rules, and private rights of action could create compliance burdens, confusion, and costs for businesses, including small businesses. They argued that entity-level exemptions for sectors already covered by federal laws like HIPAA or GLBA promote consistency, and that Attorney General enforcement is preferable to private lawsuits. Committee members questioned witnesses on patchwork concerns, the scope of exemptions, and whether the proposed bills would harm or help consumers and small businesses. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; written testimony was noted as due later, and the committee continued taking testimony from multiple panels and virtual witnesses.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Hearing Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services and Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health Mar 25th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- It claims to incentivize better assessments, but the administration has offered no evidence that rising
- when those supports make sure that individuals...” “...regain their eligibility, that we can then claim
- not timely in their determination and counties move them into the residual, we cannot retroactively claim
- but, without additional support or rehabilitation of their home or other sorts of repairs or deep cleaning
- Oz and Donald Trump are loudly claiming... Families are under attack. Dr.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Finance Division I (03/05/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- I just was trying to figure out if we want to clean it up a little more, Mr. Chair. I see.
- The question I have for you is: when was the last time that the $125,000 per claim was adjusted?
- We're talking about a catastrophic injury, which claims are in the millions.
- insurance companies were very, very responsive to claims that were clearly claims.
- that were clearly responsive to claims that were clearly claims<04:30:21.760><c> it's</c><04:30:22.040
Summary:
The committee took up House Bill 2 retirement provisions, focusing on Group Two/Tier B changes in pages 25-39. Jan Goodwin of the New Hampshire Retirement System and deputy chief counsel Mark Kavanaugh explained that the 2025 bill is largely similar to prior versions, but it restores certain pre-2011 benefit rules for Tier B members, including changes to average final compensation and earnable compensation, and it also addresses the annuity multiplier for years of service. Members discussed the tier structure, with Tier A referring to vested members, Tier B to those hired before 11/1/12 who were not vested, and Tier C to later hires. Several members expressed concern that the bill’s purpose was to restore Tier B benefits, not to change Tier A rules or create broader changes affecting newer hires.
The retirement system flagged two likely drafting problems. First, it said a provision appears to omit a special-duty/earnable-compensation limitation in the Group Two section, which they believed was a scrivener’s error caused by moving language out of the Group One definition without adding it back for Group Two. Second, they noted the bill’s multiplier language overlaps with changes already enacted in HB 1647, which increased the multiplier for service beyond 15 years for Group Two and carried an estimated $26 million cost. The committee discussed that HB 1647 was originally broader in the House, but the Senate narrowed it to Tier B only.
The actuary’s comparison of the 2023 and 2025 HB 2 versions showed the bills are close, but the 2025 version differs in funding and timing. Staff said the 2025 bill appropriates $2.5 million more per year for 10 years, and that, together with updated actuarial assumptions and a larger share of the affected tier having already retired or otherwise left service, results in a larger reduction in unfunded liability than the 2023 bill: about $98.2 million versus $68.5 million. Employer contribution impacts were described as small overall, though the 2025 bill was said to be somewhat more favorable than the 2023 version. Members also questioned why House Bill 1 only funds $5 million in the first year, and staff said that was tied to the governor’s revenue estimate and that the full funding does not begin immediately. No votes were taken in the portion provided; the committee mainly received testimony, asked clarifying questions, and noted that some issues would be addressed in the fiscal note worksheet.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee Jun 22nd, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- allow to knowingly design products that exploit the developmental vulnerabilities of children and then claim
- Today, many platforms rely on self-attestation, asking a child to click a button, to claim that they
- And if we're looking for a policy that's clean out of the gate, this isn't it. This is not it.
- the world, all to get a maximum penalty of less than the jurisdiction under current law of small claims
- Claims court.
Summary:
The committee first heard AB 1159, which would update California student data privacy law for educational technology and college-level platforms. The author and supporters argued that students’ personal information is being collected and used far beyond educational purposes, including sensitive health and demographic data, and said the bill would limit misuse and add stronger privacy protections. Support came from privacy, labor, education, and civil rights groups, while opposition from college store and industry representatives focused on narrowing the definition of “operator,” preserving institution-related communications, and concerns about the bill’s private right of action. Members raised questions about how the bill would affect scholarships, financial aid, adult students, consent, and litigation; the author said the bill includes a right to cure and notice to the Attorney General. The committee voted 4-0 to pass the bill to Appropriations, with the measure placed on call.
The committee then took up AB 1709, which would set a minimum age of 16 for social media accounts on platforms with specified addictive design features and create a youth safety commission. The author, pediatric and safety advocates, and several public supporters argued that social media companies intentionally design compulsive features that harm youth mental health, sleep, and development, and that the bill is a necessary product-safety response. Opponents argued the bill is overbroad, may be ineffective, raises First Amendment concerns, and could cut off vulnerable youth from important online support networks. Members focused heavily on possible amendments, especially a non-addictive feed option for younger users and strengthening the commission; the author said he was open to those changes and to further work with the committees. The bill was moved to Judiciary on a 5-0 vote and placed on call.
At the end of the excerpt, the author began presenting a third measure, AB 2076, which would strengthen California’s Parents’ Accountability and Child Protection Act by adding nitrous oxide to the list of age-verified dangerous products, banning purchase with gift cards or store credit, and increasing penalties for large sellers. The author described nitrous oxide as increasingly accessible to minors online and cited enforcement gaps in the current law, but the transcript cuts off before testimony or action on that bill.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Transcript Highlights:
- We intentionally kept our analysis of this very clean.
- Critics, as can be seen in the 2000 voter handbook, were claiming a $2.7 to $3 billion hit to state tax
- And history suggests the near-term impact on the budget will be far more modest than opponents claim
- which is informed by Massachusetts history with individual income tax cuts, shows these catastrophic claims
- Recent claims that this proposal would cost the state billions of dollars are not based on the math of
Summary:
The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions.
Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel.
Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.
AZ
Arizona 2026 Regular Session
04/28/2026 - Joint Appropriations
Transcript Highlights:
- Okay, so we still have no idea where Senator Epstein's claim of a $7,000 income loss will come from.
- Okay, so we still have no idea where Senator Epstein's claim of a $7,000 income loss will come from.
- That would be really helpful for me to evaluate OSPB's claims. So I will stand by. Thank you, Mr.
- of Arizona, they conducted an exhaustive poll which determined that 74% of Arizonans want to see a clean
- I do think a lot of the claims made by my colleagues, I would argue, are rather spurious.
Summary:
The joint appropriations committee met on April 28 to review the FY 2027 budget package, including the general appropriations feed bills (HB 4138 and SB 1831) and related budget reconciliation measures. Staff described the budget as including about $17.96 billion in general fund appropriations, a one-time transfer of state monies to increase revenues, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general fund budgets, and several one-time restorations or continuations for items such as school facilities, child care, child safety, corrections stipends, and public safety operating costs. Members spent much of the meeting debating how the across-the-board cuts would be implemented, which programs might be affected, and how fund sweeps from prior-year appropriations and special funds would work, including questions about universities, public safety, rural hospitals, transportation grants, the Corporation Commission, and health insurance costs for state employees and troopers.
A major point of discussion was the impact on universities and higher education. Arizona Board of Regents representatives said the proposed reductions and fund sweeps would affect already obligated dollars, research, staffing, and student aid programs, and could force difficult decisions about programs such as the Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and other pass-through funds. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the cuts could lead to tuition increases or reductions in services, while majority members emphasized that agencies and the executive branch should decide how to absorb the reductions. Another major topic was health care and the state employee health plan: staff explained that the budget includes a $228 million general fund infusion to stabilize the plan, while a separate reconciliation bill would raise employee premiums over three years. Members also discussed whether the budget’s changes to AHCCCS/Access and hospital eligibility rules could increase costs for hospitals and reduce coverage.
Public testimony largely opposed the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, and local governments argued that the proposal would shift costs onto working families, reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care, and rural infrastructure, and protect tax benefits for data centers and higher-income taxpayers. A mayor from Globe asked for state help after severe flooding damaged roads, water lines, and homes, while a motorcycle safety advocate asked the committee to review a DPS motorcycle safety fund appropriation. Committee members and staff repeatedly clarified that some items discussed were one-time appropriations not continued into FY 2027, that some fund sweeps were from unspent or unencumbered balances, and that the committee planned to take a mass roll-call vote on the budget bills at the end of the meeting.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions Mar 30th, 2026
Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions
Transcript Highlights:
- We intentionally kept our analysis of this very clean.
- Critics, as can be seen in the 2000 voter handbook, were claiming a $2.7 to $3 billion hit to state tax
- And history suggests the near-term impact on the budget will be far more modest than opponents claim
- which is informed by Massachusetts history with individual income tax cuts, shows these catastrophic claims
- Recent claims that this proposal would cost the state billions of dollars are not based on the math of
Keywords:
tax revenue, state surplus, taxpayer refunds, budget growth, Massachusetts General Laws, income tax, tax reduction, state law, personal income tax, tax rates
Summary:
The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state tax collection cap law (62F) so the cap would be based on the prior year’s actual collections plus wage-and-salary growth and would include surtax revenue. Committee chairs outlined the hearing process and noted that the measures would need additional signatures to qualify for the 2026 ballot if not enacted by the legislature.
The committee’s expert witness, Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, said the income tax proposal would lower the base rate in stages beginning in 2027 and would ultimately reduce state income tax collections by about $5.4 billion annually when fully implemented. He estimated savings would vary by income level, from a few hundred dollars for lower- and middle-income households to about $10,700 for taxpayers at the surtax threshold. He argued the proposal would improve tax competitiveness but would also require major budget adjustments, likely including reserve use, spending cuts, and possibly new revenue measures; he cited prior downturns and said the state’s rainy day fund is stronger than in past recessions, though spending growth and health care costs remain concerns. On the 62F proposal, he said rebasing the cap to prior-year collections would make refunds more likely, with modeled refunds totaling about $7.9 billion without the surtax and $10.1 billion with it over the last decade, and warned it could reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions.
Proponents of both petitions, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, NFIB, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that Massachusetts faces an affordability and competitiveness crisis and that lower taxes would help families, small businesses, job creation, and outmigration. They said the income tax cut would put about $1,300 a year back into the hands of average families, help pass-through businesses reinvest, and improve the state’s ability to compete with lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, presented a model projecting average annual revenue losses of about $680 million during the phase-in and a total net income tax revenue impact of $2 billion to $2.2 billion, while saying long-term revenue growth would be stronger after implementation. The hearing ended with committee questions and a brief dispute over a planned voter testimonial video, which the chairs said was not appropriate for the hearing at that point.
VA
Transcript Highlights:
- noted that the person had appeared before her an average of six to 10 times, and said that such a claim
- Judge Sachs said that the claim that she had “never” been patient by someone who had appeared before
- I did small civil claims courts, circuit courts as a plaintiff's attorney, as well as some small defense
- I did small civil claims courts, circuit courts as a plaintiff's attorney, as well as some small defense
- It’s never clean. It’s messy.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs (11/03/2025)
Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs
Transcript Highlights:
- But as this sits right now, the legislation is, I think, clean with respect to being aligned with federal
- , rather than accepting it initially, you would ask them to provide documentation to support their claim
- documentation to to them to provide documentation to to support<00:37:35.680><c> their</c><00:37:36.160><c> claim
- And</c><00:37:37.599><c> then</c><00:37:38.000><c> my</c><00:37:38.320><c> other</c> support their claim
- And then my other support their claim.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- reconstitutes the events trust fund so that most of our counties can use it, and we did a little cleaning
- have the opportunity to have that affirmative defense to prove that whatever material somebody is claiming
- right, to have that affirmative defense to prove that whatever material, right, that somebody is claiming
- that is harmful, false, does not, does not, that whatever material, right, that somebody is claiming
- SB 2544 by Hancock, relating to health benefit claims, for the Committee on Insurance.
Summary:
The House convened with a quorum, offered an invocation, led the pledges, and approved a series of routine motions, including excusing absent members and granting permission for several committees to meet while the House was in session. Members also adopted several memorial and recognition resolutions, including H.R. 1023 honoring Christian Beerbill, H.R. 1033 recognizing International Bereaved Mother’s Day, and H.R. 877 recognizing Urban League Advocates Day. The House also recommitted SB 17 and HB 4211 to committee and postponed SCR 27 and HB 2145 for later consideration.
The chamber then took up a long third-reading calendar of bills covering a wide range of topics, including Sunset review measures, health care workforce and pricing, child custody and family law, Medicaid, rural ambulance grants, energy reporting, public information requests, trail development, virtual meeting disruptions, occupational licensing, protective orders, county leave pools, animal cruelty, infrastructure, and higher education. Most bills were explained briefly by their authors and passed with broad support, though several drew notable opposition, including HB 5265, HB 2402, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 1056, HB 281, HB 3308, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 294, HB 809, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 285, HB 1353, HB 3960, HB 4044, HB 4264, HB 2807, HB 3349, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 1201, and others.
Several bills prompted extended debate or amendments. HB 3237, extending public energy-use reporting for state and higher-education buildings, passed after questions about its public-sector-only scope and energy savings. HB 3326, addressing public service loan forgiveness credit for adjunct professors, initially failed on a 69-70 vote but later passed after verification and machine corrections. HB 3211, concerning optometrists in managed care plans, adopted a Buckley amendment before passing. HB 2213 on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association board composition adopted a Metcalf amendment requiring certain board members to be Texas residents. HB 412, dealing with harmful materials and sexual performance of a child, generated extensive questioning about its scope, existing legal standards, and effects on educators and medical professionals; the excerpt ends during that debate.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- The expansion window is actually a clean-up to wait. We had things originally in statute.
- lots of people moving to Austin from California, how long do they have to be here before they can claim
- As an undocumented student, education has been one of the few things that I could truly claim as my identity
- undocumented students and repeals the Texas DREAM Act of 2001, which currently... ...undocumented students claim
- So, I mean, it is a mistake to claim that these students are costing us more when we all the... ...data
Keywords:
higher education, tuition rates, financial support, immigration status, Texas law, SB 1835, resident tuition, nonresident students, scholarship students, public higher education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Education Code Section 54.213, tuition waiver, in-state tuition, out-of-state students, higher education finance, enrollment cap, capacity limit, workforce development area, nonimmigrant visa
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- HB 5255 by Raymond relates to a claim of actual innocence by a person convicted of a criminal offense
- HB5343 by Gain relates to the reimbursement payments of claims for certain health benefit plan issuers
- against alcoholic beverage providers for providing alcohol to certain individuals and prohibiting claims
- a person to serve as a member of the Subcommittee on County and Regional Government. about faith claims
- HB5600 also relates to the development and expansion of clean hydrogen production, distribution, and
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- He says people in jail claiming to have new evidence will not all get trials; only a very small number
- While some claim that Senate Bill 141 will lead to a floodgate of litigation or a significant impact
- There are disincentives for guilty people to file claims because unfavorable results can negatively impact
- While some claim that Senate Bill 141 will lead to a floodgate of litigation or a significant impact
- Yes, you would like to have that cleaned up, understood.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Overview of Minnesota State budget request before House higher education committee 3/11/25
Transcript Highlights:
- their Grant through a number of to claim their Grant through a number of convenient<00:20:39.159><c>
- ><00:30:34.399><c> their</c><00:30:34.559><c> funds</c><00:30:35.039><c> either</c> is approved to claim
- their funds either is approved to claim their funds either through<00:30:35.600><c> direct</c><00:30
- The statute you see on the slide there is based on the change in total annual unemployment claims each
- This is a broader level than just looking at the claims for the newly eligible employees.
Summary:
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities presented an overview of the system and several budget riders. Board Chair George Soul described the system’s structure, noting 26 colleges and seven universities governed by a 15-member board, and emphasized that Minnesota State serves about 270,000 students annually, including many students of color, adult learners, Pell-eligible students, first-generation students, and veterans. He highlighted the system’s workforce role, saying it offers more than 4,000 programs, extensive employer partnerships, and that 86% of graduates find jobs in their field or a related field. He then turned the presentation over to system staff to discuss specific funding requests.
Associate Vice Chancellor Kim Lynch focused on the Z-degree textbook program, which supports zero-textbook-cost courses and degrees. She said prior legislative support has produced about $3.1 million in savings in academic year 2024 and more than $12.6 million in aggregate savings, with 10 colleges now offering Z degrees and 12 more on track or exploring implementation. She described the program’s use of open educational resources, instructional design support, and library resources to fill gaps where free materials are not available, and said students save roughly $7 to $10 for every $1 invested. Members praised the program and asked about its expansion.
Associate Vice Chancellor Paul Shepard discussed student support funding, including a centralized basic needs resource hub, the Mantra Health mental health platform, and the emergency grant program. He said student surveys showed significant food, housing, and homelessness insecurity, and that the basic needs hub has served over 2,400 students with a 97% positive response rate. He said Mantra provides telecounseling, peer support, self-paced courses, and crisis support, and clarified in response to questions that it is not AI-driven and does not sell student data; general usage data is collected, and follow-up with campus counselors occurs only at the student’s request. He also said the emergency grant program has distributed over $3 million to more than 4,800 students, with grants averaging just under $700, and that campuses use application review and recordkeeping to manage repeat requests. Members asked about counselor staffing, data privacy, and grant safeguards.
The final item addressed sexual assault reporting and prevention funding. System staff said the appropriation supports technology infrastructure for statutory reporting, case management for investigations, campus prevention training, and professional development for Title IX coordinators and related staff. They noted that the statutory student training requirement is funded by individual colleges and universities, not by this appropriation. No formal votes were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs (03/05/2025)
Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs
Transcript Highlights:
- He was only 15 months old, given routine vaccinations, given a clean bill of health, and he was dead
- </c><02:36:51.479><c> bill</c><02:36:51.720><c> of</c> vaccinations given a clean bill of vaccinations
- given a clean bill of health<02:36:52.479><c> and</c><02:36:52.640><c> he</c><02:36:52.800><c> was</
- </c><03:08:52.520><c> that</c><03:08:52.680><c> religious</c> 4216 students had claimed that religious
- 4216 students had claimed that religious exemption<03:08:53.920><c> and</c><03:08:54.040><c> that</c
NH
New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session
House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services (04/21/2026)
Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services
Transcript Highlights:
- </c> to people making claims. to people making claims.
- </c><00:14:25.640><c> So,</c> having just getting the claims paid.
- So, having just getting the claims paid.
- </c> discover it because there's been a claim discover it because there's been a claim by<00:20:10.440
- at a claim by attempt at a claim by<00:20:12.840><c> the</c><00:20:12.960><c> employee</c><00:20:13.720
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Commerce and Consumer Affairs (04/23/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- </c> are paying for claims dollar for dollar. are paying for claims dollar for dollar.
- </c><04:43:47.280><c> than</c> claims other years claims greater than claims other years claims greater
- Pharmacy claims are essentially paid immediately; pharmacy claims are paid within a week.
- Claims are by nature volatile.
- No claims reserves working as expected. No claims were<05:21:04.638><c> unpaid.
Summary:
The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Senator Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would clarify that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary policy for a newborn’s care unless the mother has no coverage or no employer-sponsored coverage. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure simply codifies the department’s long-standing interpretation of existing law. Representative Miles asked whether the coverage would extend to a grandchild if a young woman on her parents’ plan had a baby, and Birdsell said it would. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed.
The committee next heard Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Senator Kevin Avard. The bill requires insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, when they change Medicare Advantage offerings. Benton Court said the bill was prompted by disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers and the department were confused by carriers exiting, changing plans, or narrowing offerings. He said the department does not regulate Medicare Advantage itself, but does license the carriers, and the notice requirement would help the department advise consumers; he also said noncompliance could affect a carrier’s license and could lead to fines. Members discussed the notice period, and the department and AHIP indicated support for changing it from 120 days to 90 days to align with federal timing. The hearing was closed with plans to work on an amendment in subcommittee.
Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Representative Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion for pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole said the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell at a loss. Members questioned whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts, whether the bill would raise consumer prices, and whether it would mainly affect independent pharmacies. Cole and others said the issue has changed over time because PBMs now control a much larger share of the market, and that the bill would let pharmacies refuse loss-making fills and direct patients to mail order instead. The discussion also noted that the bill excludes Medicare and Medicaid and that the current proposal does not create a middle-ground option for patients to pay a premium at the counter.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- Speaker, if I know that claiming a religious exemption from immunization should be as simple as possible
- Speaker, if I know that claiming a religious exemption from immunization should be as simple as possible
- Speaker, if I know that claiming a religious exemption from immunization should be as simple as possible
- language, which some people have concerns with, which liability may be predicated from relying on claims
- language, which some people have concerns with, which liability may be predicated from relying on claims