Connecticut Senate Bill SB01006

Connecticut 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/22/25

Caption

An Act Requiring In-network Rates During Health Insurance Contract Disputes.

Impact

The implementation of SB01006 could have significant implications for state laws governing health insurance and hospital agreements. By mandating in-network rates during disputes, it seeks to minimize the risk of financial discrepancies for patients caught in the middle of contractual negotiations. This could potentially lead to more standardized practices regarding patient treatment availability and billing transparency, a critical issue in contemporary healthcare discussions. Proponents argue that it promotes patient welfare and protects individuals' rights to continuous healthcare service.

Summary

SB01006, titled 'An Act Requiring In-network Rates During Health Insurance Contract Disputes', aims to establish a requirement for health insurance contracts between carriers and hospitals to include provisions ensuring that covered persons can continue receiving treatment from in-network providers at in-network rates, even during disputes between the health carrier and the hospital. This measure is designed to protect patients from potential sudden financial burdens that may arise due to such disputes. It addresses the growing concerns around healthcare accessibility and the appropriateness of billing during conflicts that can arise in provider contracts.

Contention

While supporters of SB01006 advocate for patient rights and uninterrupted access to healthcare, there may be notable points of contention regarding the bill's implications for healthcare providers and insurance companies. Opponents could raise concerns about the financial impact on health carriers who may feel constrained in their negotiations with hospitals. They might argue that enforcing in-network rates during disputes could result in adverse outcomes, such as increased premiums or reduced contract flexibility, potentially affecting the quality and availability of care. Overall, the discussions surrounding this bill could highlight the ongoing tension between regulatory oversight in healthcare and the operational autonomy of health providers and insurers.