screen-shot-2018-04-11-at-8-16-41-am-221x300-7645711As the legislative session heads into its closing weeks, it’s time to update Mandate Watch, the Empire Center’s tally of bills that would impose additional coverage requirements—and costs—on health plans.

The goal is to raise awareness of an expensive habit in Albany: passing insurance mandates without thinking through the consequences.

Most such bills mandate coverage for services that go beyond the evidence-based recommendations of medical societies and other experts—and might therefore encourage unnecessary or wasteful care. Almost all would tend to push up premiums that are already among the highest in the country. None has been subjected to rigorous cost-benefit analysis.

Since most large employers are self-insured, and therefore exempt from state regulation under federal law, mandates mostly affect the small-group and non-group markets—where buyers are more likely to drop coverage if premiums grow too quickly.

Our latest search of pending legislation, summarized here, turned up 120 proposals for new insurance mandates. That’s up 29, or almost one-third, since Mandate Watch was inaugurated in March 2017.

Most are one-house bills with little chance of becoming law. But six have passed the Assembly this year, and 25 have majority sponsors in both houses.

One of the more consequential bills—and probably the most expensive—is A. 2646 (Simotas)/S. 3148 (Savino), mandating coverage of in vitro fertilization (previously discussed in detail here). A similar law in Massachusetts adds an estimated $200 a year to the average cost of coverage for a family of four.

Other proposals include:

Some of these bills exceed mainstream guidelines. The American Cancer Society, for example, recommends mammograms for women at average risk starting at age 45, and says they should be optional at age 40.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, meanwhile, urges biennial mammograms starting at age 50, and says they should be discretionary for women in their 40s.

By ignoring such guidelines, lawmakers run the risk of promoting unnecessary or even harmful procedures—and driving up premiums in the bargain.

To avoid such possibilities, the Legislature in 2007 voted to establish a commission to study the costs and benefits of proposed mandates before enacting them. Unfortunately, the officials responsible for appointing members of the panel never followed through, and Governor Cuomo vetoed its unused funding last year.

Looking to revive that good idea is Assemblyman Clifford Crouch (R-Bainbridge). He is sponsoring A. 2230, which would establish a Health Benefit and Cost Commission to review both existing mandates and new proposals.

“Many of the benefits mandated have served to ensure that people have access to care that they need, but this mandated coverage has also resulted in premium increases,” the sponsor’s memo says. “It is the sponsors’ belief that the Legislature and the public should have cost and benefit analysis before deciding whether to require all policies to include a certain benefit.”

About the Author

Bill Hammond

As the Empire Center’s senior fellow for health policy, Bill Hammond tracks fast-moving developments in New York’s massive health care industry, with a focus on how decisions made in Albany and Washington affect the well-being of patients, providers, taxpayers and the state’s economy.

Read more by Bill Hammond

You may also like

How a Medicaid Program To Improve Nursing Home Care Ended Up Paying for Union Benefits

New York State's budget-making process sometimes works like a closed loop, as interest groups on the receiving end of state spending reinvest a portion of their proceeds to lobby Albany for still more money. Read More

Despite Lingering Shortages, New York’s Health-Care Workforce Is Bigger Than Ever

The state's health-care workforce is recovering unevenly from the pandemic, with persistently lower employment levels in some areas and robust growth in others. This mixed pattern c Read More

The Wacky Math of New York’s Essential Plan

Thanks to an absurdly wasteful federal law, New York's Essential Plan is expected to continue running billion-dollar surpluses even as state officials more than double its spending over the next several years. Read More

In a Tight Budget Year, New York’s Hospital Lobby Shoots for the Moon

As Governor Hochul calls for spending restraint next year, influential hospital lobbyists are pushing what could be the costliest budget request ever floated in Albany. In a , the G Read More

Putting the Mission in Hochul’s Health Commission

Last week Governor Hochul answered one big question about her Commission on the Future of Health Care – the names of its members – but left a fundamental mystery unresolved:  W Read More

Medicaid Drug ‘Carve-Out’ Led to Double Payments

The state's Medicaid program has effectively been double-paying for prescription drugs for the past six months due to a glitch with the roll-out of its pharmacy "carve-out." Since A Read More

DFS Pulls Back Draft Regulations That Would Have Added a Fee for Prescriptions

A package of proposed regulations that included a $10.18 fee for filling most drug prescriptions was withdrawn Tuesday by the Department of Financial Services in the face of broad opposition. Read More

Hochul’s Promised Health Care Commission Has Yet To Be Appointed

A health-care commission that is supposed to be helping the state control soaring Medicaid costs – which Governor Hochul promised in January and described as "under way" last month – appears not to exist. Thre Read More