32903127992_7af850921d_z-300x200-2157459There are plenty of reasons for New Yorkers to be leery of the House Republican health plan, but Governor Andrew Cuomo’s gestures of resistance on Monday raise several objections.

Cuomo announced that the Department of Financial Services will be issuing emergency regulations to ban health plans from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions, age, or gender and to mandate continued coverage of all Essential Health Benefits under President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

He further declared that insurers who withdraw from New York’s Obamacare exchange would be banned from contracting with Medicaid, Child Health Plus, and other state-funded programs.

The regulatory actions appear procedurally questionable, unlikely to have any real impact in the short term, and possibly counterproductive in the long term. The contracting policy raises fairness questions and could have unintended side effects.

There’s no emergency.

According to the state’s rule-making manual, agencies can impose regulations on an emergency basis – without a comment period or public hearing – under two conditions:  a) when “immediate adoption of a rule is necessary for the preservation of the public health, safety, or general welfare” and b) when following the usual procedure would be “contrary to the public interest.”

Emergency rules must be replaced by fully vetted rules after 90 days.

In this case, the supposed threat to New Yorkers is federal legislation that is still being debated in Congress. Even if it passes the Senate, it wouldn’t take effect until next year at the earliest. That leaves plenty of time to follow full-fledged rule-making procedures.

The proposed rules would apply to only a fraction of New Yorkers.

Most large-employer health plans are exempt from state regulation under federal law.

Also unaffected would be government-operated health plans such Medicare, Medicaid, and Child Health Plus.

Cuomo’s proposals would apply only to health plans sold to small groups (100 employees or less) and to individuals, representing perhaps half of the subset of the population with commercial coverage.

Some of the protections are already codified in state law.

Cuomo’s announcement said the proposed rules would mandate that health plans “do not discriminate against New Yorkers with preexisting conditions or based on age or gender.”

A state law enacted in 1992 – under Governor Mario Cuomo – bars insurance companies from refusing coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. The law also requires plans to charge premiums without regard to age or health condition.

It’s unclear how the proposed regulations would expand on those protections.

Cuomo’s proposed rules would also require small-group and individual health plans to cover all Essential Health Benefits as defined in the Affordable Care Act. That requirement, too, is already codified by state law.

The House GOP health plan, if passed, would keep Essential Health Benefits in place, but allow states to seek waivers from some of them. It’s far from clear that New York would ever seek such a waiver. When and if a future governor chose to do so, Cuomo’s executive actions would present no real obstacle. A future governor could repeal the regulations just as easily as he is imposing them.

The proposed contracting policy raises fairness questions, and could be counterproductive.

The governor said health plans that withdraw from the state Obamacare exchange, known as the New York State of Health, will be banned from doing business with other state programs, such as Medicaid and Child Health Plus.

However, his announcement made no mention of plans that previously quit the exchange, or that never participated to begin with. Would they, too, be banned from handling Medicaid and CHP? If not, why not?

Nevada state officials have taken a more carrot-oriented approach, notifying plans in advance that their bids for Medicaid contracts would be more likely to be accepted if they also sold coverage on Nevada’s ACA exchange.

As Politico’s Dan Goldberg points out ($), there are counties in the state where no more than two plans offer Medicaid managed care. If Cuomo’s ban drives too many insurers out of the program, Medicaid recipients in those areas could run out of choices.

If the House GOP plan does become law, some of the proposed rules would make things worse for New Yorkers.

A major provision of the House plan would replace Obamacare’s income-based tax credits with credits based on age – ranging from $2,000 a year for people in their 20s, to $4,000 for people in their 60s – based on the assumption that premiums get higher as people age.

But that’s not true under New York’s current ban on age-rating. Unless the state modifies that rule, the new federal tax credits would shortchange younger New Yorkers while providing a relative windfall for older ones.

The House bill would also prohibit using federal tax credits to buy any health plan that covers abortion. Under Cuomo’s rules, all regulated health plans must cover abortion (with limited exceptions for religious organizations), which would severely restrict the options of New York consumers.

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

While New York’s Medicaid Budget Soared, Public Health Funding Languished

Four years after a devastating pandemic, the state has made no major investment to repair or improve its public health defenses. While funding for Medicaid over the past four years Read More

A Medicaid Grant Recipient Sponsors a Pro-Hochul Publicity Campaign

While much of the health-care industry is attacking Governor Hochul's Medicaid budget, at least one organization is rallying to her side: Somos Community Care, a politically active medical group in the Bronx that recently r Read More

New Jersey’s Pandemic Report Shines Harsh Light on a New York Scandal

A recently published independent review of New Jersey's pandemic response holds lessons for New York on at least two levels. First, it marked the only serious attempt by any state t Read More

Loss of Patients and Revenue Foreshadowed Downsizing for SUNY Downstate

The SUNY-owned hospital in Brooklyn facing a newly announced downsizing plan has seen its patient volume and revenue plunge over the past decade, according to a review of its financial reports. Read More

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

Hochul’s ‘Straight Talk’ on Medicaid Isn’t Straight Enough

Arguably the biggest Medicaid news in Governor Hochul's budget presentation was about the current fiscal year, not the next one: The state-run health plan is running substantially over budget. 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