Oklahoma Senate Bill SB142

Oklahoma 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/23
• Refer: 2/7/23

Caption

Health insurance; modifying copayment cap of certain insulin supply; requiring copayment cap for certain diabetes equipment and supplies; requiring reduction in cost-sharing amount for certain supply and equipment. Effective date.

Impact

The implications of SB142 are significant for individuals managing diabetes in Oklahoma. The proposed law aims to enhance accessibility to necessary medications and equipment by reducing the financial burden on patients, thereby ensuring that more citizens can adhere to their daily treatment regimens. By capping costs, the bill endeavors to prevent insurers from imposing exorbitant out-of-pocket expenses, which can lead to non-compliance with prescribed treatment plans and exacerbate health issues. The enforcement of compliance will fall under the purview of the Insurance Commissioner and the State Department of Health, tasked with oversight to ensure that the regulations are followed.

Summary

Senate Bill 142, introduced by Senator Hicks, seeks to amend state laws relating to health insurance provisions specifically targeting diabetes treatment. This legislation focuses on establishing a copayment cap for insulin and diabetes-related equipment and supplies. The bill mandates that health benefit plans limit the copayment to no more than $25 for a 30-day supply of insulin, regardless of the dosage necessary, and applies to all health coverage issued or renewed after November 1, 2023. Additionally, the bill states that if the cost of diabetes equipment exceeds $35, the insurance must still ensure that the cost to the insured does not exceed this amount.

Contention

Discussion around SB142 has highlighted points of contention among various stakeholders. Supportive voices argue that the bill is a crucial measure to support those with diabetes, emphasizing that high costs can lead to dire health consequences, including potential hospitalizations. Conversely, there are concerns from some insurance providers about the financial implications of mandated caps, arguing that it could lead to increased premiums or reduced coverage options in other areas. This tension reflects broader discussions in health policy about the sustainability of insurance models for high-cost treatments, pushing for a balance between patient affordability and insurer viability.