Legislature(2015 - 2016)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/14/2016 08:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB130 | |
| HB314 | |
| SB130 | |
| HCR4 | |
| HB77 | |
| SB130 | |
| SB206 | |
| SB130 | |
| SB55 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 130 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 247 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 77 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HCR 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 55 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 314 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 206 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 206
"An Act relating to a reinsurance program for
residents who are high risks and insurer assessments
to cover the costs of the reinsurance program;
relating to application for state innovation waivers
for health care insurance; relating to definitions of
'residents who are high risks' and 'covered lives';
and providing for an effective date."
8:57:27 AM
FRED PARADY, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, discussed SB 206. The
individual insurance market for health insurance in the
state was in crisis. He remarked that there were only two
carriers, and one carrier was currently in weakened
financial condition. He stressed that both carriers were
losing money in the individual market. He pointed out that
the pool was too small and the costs were two high.
Senator Dunleavy queried the factors the Division of
Insurance considered when requesting a waiver.
LORI WING-HEIER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INSURANCE,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
explained that the application process was intense, and
required public hearings. She remarked that there was an
examination of the individual mandate as to when
individuals should be allowed to participate. She stated
that there would be a determination to eliminate the tax or
penalty for not participating in the employer or individual
mandate. She remarked that there would be point of
restrictive or too great a burden to participate in the
individual plans. She shared that there was also an
examination of the subsidies to "smooth the curve." She
remarked that the current curve for subsidies was stark,
with a "line in the sand" for subsidy qualification.
Senator Dunleavy asked what type of opposition to the bill
the department had encountered.
Mr. Parady relayed that the bill had two key components:
the assessment process; and the Section 13.32 innovation
waiver. He stated that there was no opposition to the
waiver process. He furthered that AETNA had expressed
opposition to the assessment plan.
Senator Dunleavy asked to hear the pros and cons of leaving
the federal plan.
Mr. Parady believed the pros outweighed the cons, because
there were 22,000 insured lives in Alaska's individual
insurance market who generated financial losses due to the
requirement to cover all individuals.
9:04:19 AM
Senator Olson queried the benefits of those in the IHS
system.
Mr. Parady deferred to Ms. Wing-Heier.
Ms. Wing-Heier replied that it had not impact on IHS
beneficiaries.
9:04:48 AM
Vice-Chair Micciche referred to page 2 of a document
entitled "SB 206 - Best Estimate Consumer Impacts," (copy
on file), and noted that the cost would be spread to other
covered.
Ms. Wing-Heier agreed
Vice-Chair Micciche queried the 15 to 18 percent premium
impact.
Mr. Parady shared that the bill allowed the division
authority to set premiums, and work through the process. He
remarked that there would be a $55 million estimated impact
on insurance premiums with $19.30 projection, resulting in
an 18 percent reduction. He remarked that over the recent
two years there was a 36 to 40 percent increase, and the
following year was expected to see a similar increase. He
stressed that the numbers were estimates based on the
actuarial studies.
Vice-Chair Micciche asked if there was a significant fiscal
note, because the state would cover its own insurance
costs.
Mr. Parady replied in the negative, because the state did
not carry stop loss premium. The state was self-insured.
The affected groups were listed on page 1, but it excluded
state employees. Therefore, there was no fiscal note.
Ms. Wing-Heier remarked that since the state was self-
insured, so those employees were not included in the plan.
SB 206 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.