Video & Transcript Research : 'premium discrimination'

Page 1 of 232
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Insurance Apr 9th, 2025

Insurance

Transcript Highlights:
  • than premiums for widowed men.
  • pay lower premiums.
  • The health plan is allowed to waive the employer's portion of the premium.
  • Before that, it talks about discriminating. What is, I don't know what discriminating is.
  • vote as far as discrimination is a pretty broad term.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Insurance Apr 9th, 2025

Insurance

Transcript Highlights:
  • Better, and yet the premium never reflects that over time.
  • House Bill 1809 seeks to expand protections against insurance discrimination for widowed women, known
  • The data shows that single individuals, including widows, are often assessed higher premiums.
  • These various factors can significantly influence the overall insurance premiums, and it's essential
  • Shortly after, her homeowner's insurance premium jumped from $185.60 to $283.75.
OK
Transcript Highlights:
  • Oklahoma homeowners pay some of the highest insurance premiums in the nation, and this is protections
  • Oklahomans pay some of the highest insurance premiums in the nation.
  • rate regulation is not really moving the needle, but other states also have had increases in their premiums
  • Thank you for that question. ...have had increases in their premiums as well.
  • Look at the price of coverage premiums and the deductibles and the cost of health care in general, it's
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/5/26

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • but each new mandate increases premiums but each new mandate increases premiums for<00:03:13.920
  • shifted directly onto premium payers. shifted directly onto premium payers.
  • their rates and lower premiums. their rates and lower premiums.
  • Is it upfront with the premiums?
  • Is it upfront with the premiums?
Bills: HF3388, HF400
Summary: The committee approved the minutes from the prior day and then heard House File 400, a bill described as a defrayal measure for health insurance mandates. Representative Perryman said the bill would not block future mandates, but would require the state to pay the added costs of any new mandated benefits so those costs would not be shifted to premium payers. She and supporters framed the bill as a way to protect affordability for Minnesota employers, workers, and families, especially in the fully insured market. Testimony in support came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Council of Health Plans. They argued that Minnesota has a high number of mandated benefits, that each new mandate adds cost to premiums, and that businesses—especially small and midsize employers—are already struggling with rising health insurance costs. The health plans representative said the bill would use the existing Commerce defrayal process to reimburse plans for eligible mandate-related claims, allowing those costs to be removed from premium rates. Several members echoed support, saying the bill would improve transparency by showing the fiscal impact of proposed mandates and help prevent people from being priced out of coverage. Members also explored how mandates apply in the market and how premiums are set. Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer explained that, unless otherwise specified, mandates generally apply to the individual, small group, and fully insured large group markets, while self-insured ERISA plans and other markets are generally outside that scope. Representative Elkins noted that the affected market is relatively small and said small businesses are increasingly moving to self-insured plans because of cost. He and others raised concerns about affordability, while Representative Smith argued that mandates often ensure needed care and that the bill shifts costs to taxpayers rather than insurers. Representative Bacham added a personal example from tribal self-insurance, saying preventive physicals had saved lives and asking whether other factors besides mandates are driving insurer costs. No amendments were offered, and the bill was laid over for possible future consideration.
NM

New Mexico 2026 Regular Session

Senate - Health and Public Affairs Jan 30th, 2026 at 03:13 pm

Senate Health & Public Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • ages, their premiums would increase as well.
  • Those are the range of the premium. Okay. And Madam Chair, Ms.
  • So otherwise, you know, premiums go up as the individual ages.
  • Original questions, the premiums are only increased based on age.
  • However, annually, premiums in New Mexico rise regardless.
Bills: SB21, SB42, SB81, SB101, SB139
NM

New Mexico 2026 Regular Session

House - Health and Human Services Feb 16th, 2026 at 09:04 am

House Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:
  • And so that helps actuaries remain, I think, with premiums.
  • Premiums in their state increased, but not because of the birthday rule.
  • This is what stabilizes the premiums and the risk pool.
  • So anytime we see changes that have The prospect of increasing premiums, it's of concern for the premium
  • The third is the role of state-imposed premium taxes, fees, and assessments.
Bills: SB101, SB21, HM52, HB132, SB14, SB20
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/4/26

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • So what is surveillance price discrimination? And I heard questions for examples.
  • So what is price discrimination.
  • And I surveillance price discrimination?
  • It's defined uh which is discrimination.
  • . discrimination. discrimination.
Bills: HF3794, HF3408
Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from March 3, 2026, and then received a presentation from the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General on the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act. Assistant Attorney General Caitlin Miko and Deputy Attorney General Jessica Whitney reviewed the law’s scope, consumer rights, business obligations, and enforcement history. They said the law took effect July 31, 2025, gives Minnesotans rights to access, delete, and opt out of sale, profiling, and targeted advertising, and is enforced by the Attorney General with penalties up to $7,500 per violation. They reported more than 200 complaints in the first six months, many warning letters, and a shift from education to active enforcement now that the initial warning-letter period has expired. Committee members asked about how the universal opt-out works, what happens when companies deny deletion or editing requests, how the office determines willful noncompliance, and whether the law could burden small businesses. The AG’s office said the opt-out can be set through privacy-protective browsers or extensions, companies must respond to consumer requests within 45 days, small businesses are exempt as defined by the SBA, and investigations look for patterns and evidence of willful conduct rather than minor technical violations. The office also said it needs additional funding to fully staff enforcement efforts and noted that it has already issued subpoenas and civil investigative demands. The committee then took up House File 3408, the Stop Grocery Surveillance Price Gouging Act. The author explained that the bill would prohibit retail grocers, physical and online, from setting individualized prices based on consumer information, would limit certain uses of facial recognition and electronic shelf labels, and would preserve narrow exceptions for discounts and loyalty programs. Public testimony followed from the Minnesota Farmers Union in support, arguing that grocery consolidation and surveillance pricing could worsen already high food costs and harm fair competition. The Minnesota Grocers Association opposed the premise that grocery stores use surveillance pricing, said shelf prices are generally uniform and set from a single storewide database, and argued electronic shelf labels are efficient and not nefarious. A technology company representative similarly said ESLs do not use personal data or facial recognition, prices are uniform, and a 2025 study found no meaningful price increases after ESL adoption. The bill was laid over for possible further discussion after the testimony.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/4/25

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • proposing a premium subsidy or a premium proposing a premium subsidy or a premium write<00:13:47.800
  • <00:19:16.919> by the highest at reducing premiums by the highest at reducing premiums by
  • doesn't act and Congress does premiums doesn't act and Congress does premiums would<00:25:26.279
  • further increases in the premiums further increases in the premiums uh<00:26:59.840> repeat
  • having insurance and paying premiums having insurance and paying premiums that<00:31:22.799>
Bills: HF837
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • So that way, you're only comparing the premium tax. ...right across the two states.
  • That's the trade-off regarding premiums—the trade-off between writing between states.
  • Texas's premium tax right now is 1.6 percent.
  • From what I understand, that could be reflected in the premiums.
  • And we write premium in approximately 40 states, so nearly 80% of states.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Commerce Committee Meeting - 2026-03-26

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • > market<00:15:36.520> would Premiums in the individual market would Premiums in the individual
  • <00:21:21.200> Chair as premium goes? Mr. Cotter. Mr. Chair as premium goes? Mr. Cotter.
  • onto premium payers. onto premium payers.
  • insurance in their premiums. insurance in their premiums.
  • advertisements at a higher premium. advertisements at a higher premium.
VT

Vermont 2025-2026 Regular Session

Discrimination Prevention - 2025-01-21 - 2:20PM

Vermont House Floor Meeting

VT

Vermont 2025-2026 Regular Session

Discrimination Prevention - 2025-01-25 - 1:15PM

Vermont House Floor Meeting

VT

Vermont 2025-2026 Regular Session

Discrimination Prevention - 2025-01-24 -10:25AM

Vermont House Floor Meeting

VT

Vermont 2025-2026 Regular Session

Discrimination Prevention - 2025-01-24 - 1:00PM

Vermont House Floor Meeting