Connecticut House Bill HB05357

Connecticut 2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/27/20
• Refer: 2/27/20

Caption

An Act Requiring The Insurance Commissioner To Study The Feasibility And Likely Effects Of Mandating Coverage For Certain Benefits Under Medicare Supplement Insurance Policies And Certificates.

Impact

If enacted, HB05357 would have significant implications on state laws pertaining to Medicare supplement insurance, particularly with how insurers handle coverage for younger Medicare beneficiaries. The study conducted by the Insurance Commissioner is expected to provide valuable insights into the affordability, accessibility, and adequacy of current Medicare supplement policies. This initiative has the potential to expand healthcare coverage options for younger individuals enrolled in Medicare, thereby improving their healthcare outcomes.

Summary

House Bill 05357 mandates that the Insurance Commissioner conduct a study evaluating the feasibility and potential impacts of requiring certain insurance providers to cover specific benefits under Medicare supplement insurance policies. This includes assessing the implications of extending coverage for coinsurance at skilled nursing facilities for individuals under sixty-five who are enrolled in Medicare Part C. Additionally, the bill addresses the need for coverage related to foreign travel emergencies and hospital deductibles for Medicare Part A beneficiaries. The findings from this study will influence future legislative decisions regarding Medicare supplement insurance in the state.

Contention

There may be points of contention surrounding HB05357, particularly regarding the costs associated with mandating additional coverage. Advocates of the bill are likely to support its provisions as a means to enhance healthcare accessibility, whereas critics may argue about the financial implications for insurance companies. Concerns may arise regarding the feasibility of requiring insurers to adjust their policies and the potential impact on insurance premiums. The balance between adequate coverage and maintaining affordable plans is expected to be a central debate in discussions surrounding the bill.