Pennsylvania House Bill HB479

Pennsylvania 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/16/23
• Refer: 3/16/23
• Refer: 5/24/23
• Report Pass: 6/5/23
• Engrossed: 6/5/23
• Refer: 6/6/23
• Refer: 6/28/23
• Report Pass: 6/29/23
• Refer: 6/30/23

Caption

An act amending the act of April 9, 1929 (P.L.343, No.176), known as The Fiscal Code, in Treasury Department, establishing the

Impact

The bill is poised to impact state laws regarding how medical assistance is funded and delivered, particularly emphasizing the financial requirements placed on ambulance services. By setting a baseline rate for reimbursement, the legislation may improve accessibility to emergency medical services for residents who rely on government-subsidized care. Additionally, it represents a significant step towards ensuring that ambulance services can operate sustainably while fulfilling their obligations to the community. The anticipated increase in reimbursement rates is expected to both facilitate better service provision and improve operational circumstances for these critical healthcare providers.

Summary

House Bill 479, introduced in Pennsylvania, proposes amendments to existing laws relating to public assistance and medical assistance. This legislation specifically addresses the reimbursement rates for ambulance transportation services. The bill stipulates that, starting January 1, 2025, reimbursement rates for ground mileage must be no less than $4 per mile for each loaded mile, applying to both capitation and fee-for-service systems. This initiative aims to enhance the financial viability of ambulance services under the state's medical assistance program, which plays a critical role in providing emergency medical care to residents.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment regarding HB 479 appears to be supportive among healthcare advocates and emergency service providers, who recognize the pressing need for adequate funding to sustain ambulance operations. Supporters argue that the bill addresses a crucial gap in the funding of emergency transport services. Nevertheless, some concerns have been raised regarding potential economic implications, specifically about how the funding increases will fit within the broader state budget and whether they will strain financial resources elsewhere in healthcare provision.

Contention

Notable points of contention center around the financial viability and sustainability of the proposed reimbursement model. Critics may highlight the need for careful consideration of the funding sources for these increases, fearing that it may lead to cuts in other essential services or budget reallocations. There is also concern about the administrative implications for the state Treasury in implementing these changes and ensuring compliance with federal regulations. The bill's provisions draw scrutiny regarding how they will align with the state's overall fiscal responsibility and healthcare priorities in the near future.