Headlines about "Health plans - mandated benefits"
Gathered from the web by the editors at BenefitsLink.com.
[Guidance Overview] Mental Health Parity: What Employers Need to Know
Excerpt: "After more than a decade of discussion, Congress has finally enacted legislation mandating full parity for mental health and substance abuse benefits. The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) became law on Oct. 3, 2008, as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. The law, which generally becomes effective in 2010, affects insured and self-insured group health plans provided by employers. Under MHPAEA, employer group health plans may not impose steeper financial requirements or stricter treatment limitations on mental health and substance abuse benefits than on medical and surgical benefits. The act does not require employers to provide mental health/substance abuse benefits. Rather, if employers provide them, the benefits must be equivalent to medical and surgical benefits. If a plan offers two or more benefit packages, the MHPAEA applies separately to each." (Watson Wyatt Worldwide)
[Guidance Overview] Economic Stimulus Package Contains New Parity Rules for Mental Health Benefits
Excerpt: "The article discusses the 'Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act,' which was part of the Economic Stimulus package enacted by Congress in October 2008. The Act increases and expands the protections for mental health benefits that were established under the 1996 Mental Health Parity Act." (Steptoe & Johnson)
Agencies Aim to Issue Mental Health and Substance Abuse Parity Regulations by January
Excerpt: "Regulators missed an Oct. 3 deadline to issue guidance on the federal mental health and substance abuse parity law. The head of the Department of Health and Human Services, one of three agencies charged with giving guidance, said that the agencies' goal is to issue regulations by January 2010. The law generally takes effect for plan years beginning on or after Oct. 3, 2009; for most calendar year plans, the law's effective date is Jan. 1, 2010. Self-funded and fully insured employer group health plans may need to decide how to comply without regulatory guidance." (Mercer LLC)
Regulations on Parity for Federal Mental Health Benefits May Be Delayed
Excerpt: "[Federal agencies have received more than 400 written comments in response to an April notice requesting input from the public on key issues associated with The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008.] Among other things, federal regulators sought comment on which provisions in the law require regulatory clarification, how out-of-network coverage for mental disorders differs from out-of-network coverage for other medical disorders, and whether special consideration should be given to small employers." (Workforce Management; free registration required)
Small Businesses Worry About Proposed Health Insurance Mandates
Excerpt: "Small business owners are concerned that mandates requiring employers to provide insurance to workers might put a strain on business, The San Diego Union-Tribune reports. 'While small businesses around the country have rallied around legislative measures that would force insurers to accept all applicants and offer government subsidies to low-income workers, they've winced at mandates to provide coverage for every employee or pay a penalty equal to as much as 8 percent of payroll.'" (Kaiser Family Foundation)
Regulators Pass Deadline for Guidance on Mental Health Parity
Excerpt: "In a recent letter, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius assured lawmakers that her department, along with the Department of Labor and Department of Treasury, are diligently working to issue guidance for implementation of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA) by January 2010. Sebelius noted that in response to a call for public comment about how best to formulate rules governing coverage of mental health issues by group health plans in April (see Feds Ask for Help on Mental Health Coverage Rules), the department received more than 400 written comments. 'HHS has been carefully evaluating the comments, along with the Department of Labor and the Department of the Treasury, as we concurrently develop the regulations needed to implement the statutory requirements,' Sebelius wrote." (PLANSPONSOR.com; free registration required)
[Guidance Overview] Mental Health Parity Guidance Delayed; GINA and EEOC Present Issues for Employee Health Risk Assessments
Excerpt: "The Health and Human Services Secretary issued a statement on October 2, 2009 indicating that employers awaiting guidance before implementing changes to medical plans required by the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 ('MHPAEA') should not expect regulations to be issued until January 2010 ? after the law goes into effect for calendar year plans. Although the law required that regulations be issued by October 3, 2009, HHS and the Labor and Treasury Departments are still working to develop them. In the absence of regulations, plan sponsors should make a reasonable 'good faith' effort to adhere to the law's intent." (Holland & Hart LLP)
[Opinion] Can a City Make Employers Offer Insurance or Pay a Fee?
Excerpt: "As part of San Francisco's push toward broader health-insurance coverage, city businesses with 20 or more employees must offer health insurance or pay a fee that goes toward health care for the uninsured. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court wants to know what the Obama administration thinks of that idea. The city's restaurant association has been fighting the ordinance in court, arguing that federal law says only the federal government can mandate employer benefits. Lower courts have gone back and forth on the issue; the Supremes earlier this year refused to issue an emergency order blocking the fees while the case is pending, the San Francisco Chronicle notes." (The Wall Street Journal)
Supreme Court Asks for Obama Administration's Stance on Healthy San Francisco
Excerpt: "The justices' action Monday is not unusual. The court regularly asks the federal government for its position in important cases, particularly those that involve a possible conflict between federal and state or local laws. Such requests indicate that one or more justices are undecided about granting review, which requires four votes on the nine-member court." (San Francisco Chronicle)
[Guidance Overview] Complying with the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008
Excerpt: "[The economic stimulus package] was adopted in October 2008 included the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (the 'Wellstone Act'). The changes made by the Wellstone Act will be effective for non-union plans for plan years beginning on or after October 4, 2009. Plan sponsors that have calendar year plans will have to comply as of January 1, 2010. In anticipation of this rapidly approaching deadline, this newsletter provides a review of these new mental health parity rules, as well as some action items to consider." (Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.)
Massachusetts Health Reform: Employer Coverage from Employees' Perspective
Excerpt: "Despite the economic downturn and rising health care costs, access to employer-based coverage in Massachusetts has increased, as has the scope and quality of coverage as assessed by workers, according to an analysis of the state's health reform plan. However, some employees in small firms have seen a significant rise in premiums and out-of-pocket expenses." (The Commonwealth Fund)
Obama Administration May Decide Healthy San Francisco's Fate
Excerpt: "The US Supreme Court has delayed a decision on the Golden Gate Restaurant Association's legal challenge to the Healthy San Francisco program, instead asking for the Obama Administration's opinion on whether the required employer contributions that fund the universal health care plan violate federal law. The GGRA suit contends the employer mandate violates the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), a view that was supported by the Bush Administration but opposed by the city and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, whose ruling against GGRA the Supreme Court is deciding whether to hear, a decision that had been expected today." (San Francisco Bay Guardian)
Massachusetts Health Reform: Employer Coverage From Employees' Perspective
Excerpt: "The national health reform debate continues to draw on Massachusetts' 2006 reform initiative, with a focus on sustaining employer-sponsored insurance. This study provides an update on employers' responses under health reform in fall 2008 . . . ." (Health Affairs)
[Guidance Overview] Governance and Compliance Advisory Update: September 2009
Excerpt: "Most of these developments relate to health and welfare plans, particularly IRS guidance on over-the-counter items for FSAs. The HHS released final regulations covering security breaches under new HIPAA rules; Ohio initiated required health care coverage for uninsured and older dependent children, and Massachusetts clarified rules under its 'pay or play' mandate." (Towers Perrin)
[Guidance Overview] New Law Will Have Significant Impact on Group Health Plans Insured in New York (PDF)
2 pages. Excerpt: "[Significant group health plan legislation was passed by the New York] legislature and signed by Gov. David A. Paterson on July 29. The new legislation will extend dependent coverage and expand Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) protections to health plan participants in the state, and may raise interesting questions in its coordination with the federal COBRA statute." (Pension & Benefits Reporter via McDermott Will & Emery)
Mandated Health Insurance Squeezes Those in the Middle
Excerpt: "As lawmakers hammer out legislation aiming to extend coverage to the country's 46 million uninsured, one of the most sweeping proposals has so far stoked relatively little debate: a requirement that nearly all Americans carry health insurance, much like drivers are required to have car insurance. All of the major health bills winding through Congress feature a so-called individual mandate similar to the one in Massachusetts. Mr. Obama supported the idea in his speech to Congress last week. Such a mandate, proponents argue, is necessary to keep premiums affordable: The healthy, who are relatively cheap to cover, help pay for the sick." (The Wall Street Journal)
Audio and Text: San Francisco's Universal Health Care Model
Excerpt: "The Healthy San Francisco Plan, the city's public health plan for the uninsured, has many of the elements currently under consideration in Washington, D.C. It was proposed as a stopgap measure until Congress moved ahead with universal coverage. Now, it's being heralded as a public option that works and a model for reform." (Morning Edition via National Public Radio)
[Opinion] Healthy San Francisco Program Rated High by Participants, According to Survey
Excerpt: "At least two thoughts here: 1. The success of this pay or play program can act as a successful model for how an employer mandate can work for the provision of health care to the greater populations, and 2. Although the initial signs are good, there are still barriers as far as explaining the program to participants and these challenges remind me of those being fought on the pension side of the ledger. The San Francisco program is not out of the woods. There is still a possibility will be found preempted under ERISA." (Workplace Prof Blog)
[Guidance Overview] Ohio Health Reforms Mandate Cafeteria Plans, Expand Access for Adult Children and Increase State COBRA Coverage Period (PDF)
3 pages. Excerpt: "Ohio's recently enacted state budget (Am. Sub. H.B. 1) includes several provisions that may affect employer-sponsored plans. The new law requires employers with 10 or more employees to offer full-time employees the opportunity to pay for health insurance with pre-tax dollars, requires insurers and public employee benefit plans to offer coverage to dependents up to age 28, and extends the period of health continuation under the state COBRA law from 6 to 12 months." (Buck Consultants)
Health Reform in Massachusetts: An Update on Insurance Coverage and Support for Reform as of Fall 2008
Excerpt: "Rather than undermining private insurance coverage, as some feared, health reform in Massachusetts has led to an expansion of employer-sponsored insurance in the state." (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation)
[Guidance Overview] Updated Employers' Guide to the 2006 Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act, as of September 2, 2009
Excerpt: "This revision has been updated to include the following items: Amendments to the Massachusetts Health Connector 'Commonwealth Care' Plan Types; Addition by the Massachusetts Health Connector of the pilot 'small group' program under Commonwealth Choice; Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy 2009 final Health Information Responsibility Disclosure (HIRD) form regulation (114.5 CMR 18.00); Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy 2009 proposed amendments to the FSC testing rules . . . ." (Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo P.C.)
Mental Health Parity As Opportunity for Employers to Improve Approach to Behavioral Health Care (PDF)
Pages 4-6 of 8 pages. (Milliman)
[Guidance Overview] New York State Insurance Law Changes Extend Continuation Coverage and Dependent Coverage Under Insured Medical Plans
Excerpt: "New York State Governor David Paterson recently signed legislation that will affect the administration of insured medical plans in New York State. The legislation generally extends the period that terminated employees may elect continuation coverage under an insured plan from 18 months to 36 months and requires medical insurers to offer continued coverage to employees' unmarried children through age 29, regardless of financial dependence." (Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC)
[Guidance Overview] Mental Health Parity: Are Separate Deductibles and Out-of-Pocket Maximums Allowed?
Excerpt: "Facing the challenge of complying with the new mental health parity requirements that become effective for plan years beginning after October 3, 2009, employers and their advisers are asking whether separate deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums are allowed for mental health and substance abuse disorder benefits. As we await official guidance, the law is less than clear." (Deloitte via BenefitsLink.com)
[Guidance Overview] Overview of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity
Excerpt: "The Wellstone/Domenici Act does not require a plan to cover mental health and/or substance abuse disorder benefits. However, if the plan covers such benefits, then it may not impose more restrictive financial requirements (cost-sharing) and treatment limitations (number of visits or days of coverage) on mental health and substance abuse disorder benefits than the predominant financial and treatment requirements applicable to all medical/surgical benefits." (ERISAdiagnostics Inc.)
[Guidance Overview] Guidance Clarifying Application of Fair Share Contribution Requirement under Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act
Excerpt: "The proposed rules leave much of the current FSC testing structure intact. They do, however, make some important clarifications relating to the employer's burden of proof. While DHCFP did not explain its reasons for making these changes, the changes appear to respond to two particular positions that the DUA is taking on audit -- positions which, in our view at least, appear to lack support. In addition, for the first time the proposed rules expressly recognize that a group health plan may consist of a premium reimbursement arrangement. This client advisory explains the key features of the DHCFP's proposed rules and their likely consequences if adopted." (Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo P.C.)
San Francisco Asks Court to Reject Case Challenging Health Care Effort
Excerpt: "On Monday, San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss the Golden Gate Restaurant Association's challenge of a Healthy San Francisco provision requiring employers to contribute to workers' health care coverage, the San Francisco Chronicle reports (Knight, San Francisco Chronicle, 8/25)." (California HealthCare Foundation)
[Guidance Overview] Changes to New York Insurance Rules Provide Longer Coverage for Terminated Employees and Dependents
Excerpt: "Unlike mini-COBRA, the law also applies to insurance policies issued to large employers that are subject to federal continuation coverage laws under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA). . . . Perhaps out of ERISA preemption concerns, the law regulates not employers but the content of insurance policies issued in New York State. Therefore, it is unclear if employers have any enforceable obligations under this law or whether it will be fully [administered] by the insurance companies." (Littler)
[Opinion] A Public Option That Works in San Francisco
Excerpt: "TWO burning questions are at the center of America's health care debate. First, should employers be required to pay for their employees' health insurance? And second, should there be a 'public option' that competes with private insurance? Answers might be found in San Francisco, where ambitious health care legislation went into effect early last year. San Francisco and Massachusetts now offer the only near-universal health care programs in the United States. The early results are in. Today, almost all residents in the city have affordable access to a comprehensive health care delivery system through the Healthy San Francisco program." (The New York Times; free registration required)
New Bill Seeks to Cover Second Opinions Under ERISA
Excerpt: "Rep. Susan Davis (D-Calif.) recently introduced a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that would add mandatory coverage for second opinions on medical treatments under several laws, including the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The Right to a Second Medical Opinion Act of 2009 would require employers to cover at least three sessions with an approved physician for the same cost to employees as a comparable visit with a primary participating provider." (California Employment Law via National Institute of Business Management)
NY Governor Signs Law to Allow Dependent Children to Remain Covered Under the Employer's Health Plan Through Age 29
Excerpt: "Governor Paterson has signed a law that revises New York State Insurance Law section 3221 to require a commercial insurer, which provides a group health insurance policy to an employer, to offer an election to an employee under that policy to continue the health care coverage of his or her dependent children who have otherwise 'aged off' of the coverage. These children may continue to be covered under the group policy through age 29, as long as they do not become eligible for other employer sponsored health insurance coverage, and are not covered by Medicare. The children need not be financially dependent on their parents to receive this coverage. For purposes of the new law, a 'dependent child' is any child of an employee who is unmarried and is under age 30." (ERISA Lawyer Blog)
Massachusetts Legislators Consider Bills Requiring Insurance Policies to Cover More Medical Conditions
Excerpt: "Massachusetts legislators this year have filed a flurry of bills - more than 70 in all - that, if passed, would substantially expand the medical services insurers are required to cover for patients but also potentially raise healthcare costs. The cascade of proposals to mandate coverage is up 50 percent from last year, and comes amid unprecedented scrutiny of healthcare spending." (The Boston Globe)
[Guidance Overview] Key Legal Changes to Keep in Mind While Designing Your 2010 Health Plans (PDF)
2 pages. Excerpt: "[This time of year] most employers are taking steps to finalize the design of their 2010 group health plans and preparing for this fall's open enrollment season. In doing so, we recommend keeping in mind the following legal developments . . . ." (Venable LLP)
Health Mandate Will Kill Jobs, Most Small Businesses Argue
Excerpt: "As Democrats struggle to pass a sweeping health care bill, employer mandates are a key flash point. The House plan would make businesses cover their employees or pay an additional 8% payroll tax to help provide government-subsidized insurance. Employers' insurance would have to cover hospitalization, outpatient care, doctor visits, prescription drugs, rehab services, preventive services, and maternity and 'well baby' care. It could have no annual or lifetime limits on benefits." (Investor's Business Daily, Inc.)
Obama Administration Stays Out of San Francisco Health Spending Case
Excerpt: "The Obama administration has not joined employers in seeking a Supreme Court review of a federal appeals court ruling that upheld San Francisco's controversial health care spending law. The administration let pass the July 10 deadline for friend-of-the-court briefs to be filed in the case." (Business Insurance)
Managing Health Benefits in Challenging Times: Mercer Survey on Recession and Reform
Excerpt: "Mercer's Survey on Recession and Reform explores how the downturn and health care reform efforts are affecting employers' health benefit programs. This Perspective reports the survey's findings on employers' expected health benefit costs in 2009 and cost-control plans for 2010; impact of the recently enacted federal COBRA subsidy, special CHIP enrollment rights and mental health parity expansion; and views on proposals to impose individual-coverage or employer pay-or-play mandates, curb employer deductions for benefits, waive ERISA pre-emption, or create a single-payer health care system. (Perspective, 13 Jul 2009, 11 pages)" (Mercer LLC)
[Guidance Overview] Recent Legislation and Regulations Require Changes to Health and Welfare Benefit Plans
Excerpt: "Congress and federal regulatory agencies have been busy enacting legislation and proffering guidance which implements many new requirements for group health and welfare benefit plans. Many of the changes will require thoughtful action on the part of administrators and sponsors of group health and welfare benefit plans. This brief outline of current health and welfare compliance developments is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather serves to illustrate the depth and breadth of changes facing plan sponsors now and in the coming months." (Littler Mendelson P.C.)
[Guidance Overview] Deadlines Loom for ParityIn Mental Health Benefits
Excerpt: "Since provisions of the new mental-health-parity law apply to benefit-plan years beginning in January 2010, companies should assess their benefits this summer and make the necessary adjustments in time for fall open-enrollment periods, experts suggest." (CFO.com)
[Guidance Overview] Preliminary Analysis of The Insurance Coverage Specifications Provided By The House Tri-Committee Group (PDF)
14 pages. July 14, 2009 letter to Rep. Charles B. Rangel. Excerpt: "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have completed a preliminary analysis of the specifications related to health insurance coverage that are reflected in draft legislation called America's Affordable Health Choices Act, which was released by the House tricommittee majority group on July 14, 2009. Among other things, those specifications would establish a mandate for most legal residents to obtain insurance, significantly expand eligibility for Medicaid, and set up insurance 'exchanges' through which certain individuals and families could receive federal subsidies to substantially reduce the cost of purchasing that coverage." (U.S. Congressional Budget Office)
[Guidance Overview] Deadlines Loom for Parity In Mental Health Benefits
Excerpt: "While the legislation does not require that employers provide mental heath coverage, it does mandate equality in coverage at those companies with more than 50 employees who already offer both kinds of benefits. Plans can no longer require higher co-pays, higher deductibles, or lower lifetime or annual dollar limits for mental health than for physical and surgical coverage." (CFO.com)
Preview of a National Benefit Standard: What's In, What's Out
Excerpt: "There are proposals on the health care reform table that would require a national benefit standard to be set. So, the question arises, which benefits should be required to be covered?" (Wolters Kluwer)
[Opinion] ERISA Preemption, Health Care Pay or Play, and the Supreme Court
Excerpt: "I have said it time and time again on this blog, that ERISA preemption serves the admirable, even if perhaps inadvertent, role of forcing health care to be tackled at the only level it can be adequately addressed, the federal one, and not at the level of state governments, which simply don't have the resources to pull it off . . . ." (Stephen Rosenberg of The McCormack Firm, LLC)
Setting a National Minimum Standard for Health Benefits: How Do State Benefit Mandates Compare with Benefits in Large-Group Plans?
Excerpt: "This issue brief considers what a broad federal minimum standard might look like by comparing existing state benefit mandates with the services and providers covered under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) Blue Cross and Blue Shield standard benefit package, an example of minimum creditable coverage that reflects current standard practice among employer-sponsored health plans. With few exceptions, benefits in the FEHBP standard option either meet or exceed those that state mandates require -- indicating that a broad-based national benefit standard would include most existing state benefit mandates." (The Commonwealth Fund)
[Guidance Overview] Supreme Court Review of San Francisco Health Insurance Mandate Sought by Restaurateurs
Excerpt: "The case involves San Francisco's 'fair share' ordinance, which requires employers with at least 20 employees to provide health coverage for their San Francisco workers. If they do not comply, employers must pay a fee to support city health clinics." (Law.com)
Self-Insured Employers Are Particularly Concerned the Mental Health Parity Act May Increase Their Healthcare Costs
Excerpt: "On an employer-by-employer basis, the financial impact of the act can be evaluated by considering two factors: the current level of mental-health and substance-abuse coverage; and the percentage of covered members reaching the current treatment limits. Plans that have comprehensive mental-health and substance-abuse benefits in place already will be less likely to experience an increase in costs than plans that offer limited services or have high co-pays and deductibles." (Human Resource Executive Online)
Loopholes in Massachusetts Health Care Law Leave Room for Limits on Coverage
Excerpt: "The state's pioneering healthcare law requires residents to have insurance that meets minimum standards, but regulators are discovering many employers' plans test the limits by exploiting loopholes in the rules. Regulators yesterday said that reviews of scores of health plans show many cap the benefits insurers pay each year on prescription drug coverage, exclude maternity coverage for dependents, or place an annual overall dollar limit on benefits. Jamie Katz, general counsel for the Connector Authority, which oversees the state's health initiative, said the gaps raise 'difficult issues' because companies are assuming their plans are adequate in the absence of specific regulations that say otherwise." (The Boston Globe)
Small Companies Seen as Benefiting from Healthcare Reform
Excerpt: "Small businesses in the United States are suffering great harm under our current healthcare system and will likely fare far better under a substantially reformed system along the lines of what is currently being debated in Washington -- as long as such a system offers appropriate levels of assistance to small businesses in meeting their healthcare obligations." (Small Business Majority)
Supreme Court Asked to Decide Legality of San Francisco Health Care Rule
Excerpt: "The Golden Gate Restaurant Association filed a petition v on Monday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to make the final decision on whether San Francisco's mandate that employers pay for health care coverage is legal. The city's first-of-its-kind universal health care program, dubbed Healthy San Francisco, began two years ago and requires that employers with at least 20 employees provide health insurance, set up health care spending accounts or pay into the city's fund." (San Francisco Chronicle)
Restaurant Owners' Group to Ask Supreme Court to Review San Francisco Health Care Spending Law
Excerpt: "A San Francisco-area restaurant trade association intends to file a petition next week with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to review a 2008 federal appeals court decision upholding the legality of San Francisco's health care spending law." (Workforce Management; free registration required)
[Opinion] Comments of American Benefits Council, U.S. Chamber on Implementation of Wellstone-Domenici Mental Health Parity Act (PDF)
9 pages. Excerpt: "We recommend that the Agencies adopt a non-enforcement policy or good faith compliance period for the first plan year for which the Act applies to any particular plan. The Act is generally effective for plan years beginning after October 3, 2009. . . . The regulations should confirm that the classification of a mental health or substance use disorder is a matter of plan design as determined by the plan sponsor. . . . Compliance with the Act will be virtually impossible if the provision of limited mental health or substance use benefits under an EAP must be compared with the medical benefits provided under the employer's medical benefit option." (American Benefits Council)
[Opinion] Kilpatrick Stockton Comments Regarding the Application of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (PDF)
5 pages. The letter addresses the use of employee assistance programs. (Kilpatrick Stockton LLP)
[Opinion] ERIC Urges Balance on Implementing Regulations under Mental Health Parity Act
Excerpt: "The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) . . . submitted comments to the Department of Labor's Employee Benefits Security Administration in response to a 'request for information' regarding the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA). . . . ERIC makes recommendations on the terms and provisions of implementing the MHPAEA, disclosure requirements, and the effective date and transition rules of the forthcoming regulations under the MHPAEA, including " (The ERISA Industry Committee)
Health Insurance Mandates in the States, 2009 (PDF)
24 pages. Excerpt: "The mandate chart is broken down on a state-by-state basis into three categories: benefits, providers and covered populations. Boxes with a 'Y' indicate that the state has passed that particular mandate. Totals for each state and mandate are also included. Thus anyone can easily determine how many mandates and which ones each state has passed." (Council for Affordable Health Insurance)
The Massachusetts Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector: Structure and Functions
Excerpt: "This issue brief describes the structure and functions of the Connector, providing a primer to policymakers interested in exploring similar reforms at the state and national level. The authors describe how the Connector works to promote administrative ease, eliminate paperwork, offer portability of coverage, and provide some standardization and choice of plans. National policymakers looking to achieve similar policy goals may find some of the structural components and functions of the Connector to be transferable to a national health reform model, say the authors." (The Commonwealth Fund)
An Update on Health Reform in Massachusetts, Fall 2008
Excerpt: "More than two years after implementation of its landmark health insurance reforms, Massachusetts had achieved historically high levels of coverage and widespread improvements in access to care, according to this study . . . on implementation of the state's reforms. The authors find, however, that constraints on provider capacity and rising health care costs -- trends that predate reform -- have eroded some of the gains. Massachusetts is now seeking ways to contain costs and expand provider capacity, including a proposal to shift from fee-for-service provider payments to global fees that emphasize care coordination and collaboration" (The Commonwealth Fund)
EBSA Semiannual Regulatory Agenda Addresses Mental Health Parity
Excerpt: "The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) has released its semiannual regulatory agenda, which outlines regulations that have been selected for review or development during the next year, as well as any regulations that have been finalized during the last six months. . . . [Among t]he prerule and proposed rule EBSA agenda items are . . . The review of the plan assets-participant contributions regulation in accordance with section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act; The development of regulatory guidance pursuant to ERISA ?712, as amended by the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-343) . . . ." (Wolters Kluwer)
Wisconsin Insurance Coverage Mandate for Ear-Implants Draws Dissent
Excerpt: "A law signed Thursday will make Wisconsin the second state in the nation to require insurers to cover the costs of cochlear implants for children. But advocates for the deaf are among those criticizing the measure." (Wausau Daily Herald)
Agencies Seek Comments on Mental Health Parity Law (PDF)
2 pages. Excerpt: "Agencies Seek Comments on Mental Health Parity LawThe IRS, Department of Labor (DOL), and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have jointly issued a Request for Information concerning the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA). Comments are due by May 28, 2009. . . . Regulations on MHPAEA are due by early October 2009." (Buck Consultants)
Pennsylvania Governor Set to Sign Dependent Health Care Coverage Measure
Excerpt: "Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell is expected to sign a bill extending health care coverage under a parent's policy for dependent children up to age 30. . . . To qualify, dependents must be unmarried, have no dependents of their own, and be residents of Pennsylvania or full-time students. Dependents also cannot have other health insurance coverage nor be eligible for government-provided health benefits." (PLANSPONSOR.com; free registration required)
Few Firms Will Drop Mental Health Coverage, According to Survey
Excerpt: "Only a few employers are considering dropping mental health coverage in response to new parity rules that take effect for plan years beginning after Oct. 3, according to a survey. Meanwhile, nearly 38% of responding employers plan to increase the promotion and use of employee assistance program services to help them achieve mental health parity, which is required under a 2008 law, concludes the survey conducted by the Partnership for Workplace Mental Health, a program of the American Psychiatric Foundation in Arlington, Va." (Business Insurance)
The links shown above have been gathered from the web by the editors at BenefitsLink.com. Each article's publisher is shown above in parentheses. Opinions expressed in each article are those of the article's publisher, not necessarily those of BenefitsLink.com, Inc. or any web site that displays these headlines in a "frame." You should contact the listed publisher for copyright information about any particular article or to inquire into the right to use the article in any manner.