One of the new laws set to take effect in Alaska will require health insurance policies to cover treatment of autism spectrum disorders.
All or portions of a number of bills became law, effective Tuesday, with the start of 2013. Another new measure provides tax incentives to encourage oil and gas exploration outside the North Slope and Cook Inlet.
A part of the autism bill took effect earlier, establishing a task force to study issues such as the state providing insurance coverage for the disorder.
The debate over autism coverage was one of the most emotional during the last regular session of the Legislature, as families and advocates descended on the Capitol to tell their stories and lobby for change.
Supporters cast the bill as a way to help children while easing the financial and emotional strain that families face in getting treatment.
Some insurance companies opposed the measure, saying it was unfair to put the burden on private companies.
However, Amy Carter, a spokeswoman for Premera Blue Cross Blue Shield, said the insurer now expects rates to rise at a lower level than initially predicted. She said Monday that Premera estimates its small and large group customers will see variable rate increases of less than 2 percent, while no impact on rates is expected at this time for individual members.
Sen. Johnny Ellis, D-Anchorage, a primary sponsor of the Senate bill, said in an email that “the state has consistently adopted state-mandated coverage as part of its standard health plan for state employees,” even though there was no requirement to do so.
“This has held true for coverage of breast cancer, prostate cancer screenings, well-baby exams and numerous other medical conditions,” he said. “Insurance coverage for autism should be no different, and I would expect and hope this happens after the next round of labor contract negotiations.”
Gov. Sean Parnell let the bill become law without his signature. He said the measure exempted about 20,000 small Alaska businesses from its effects while requiring insurance companies to provide coverage in policies purchased on the private market by larger employees.
Autism and autism spectrum disorder are general terms for a group of complex disorders of brain development characterized by difficulties in social interaction, verbal and nonverbal communication and repetitive behaviors.
In a letter to legislative leaders in June, Parnell cited the benefits of early diagnosis and treatment and said opponents didn’t provide detailed analyses for their assertions that premium costs could rise by 3 percent a year.
He said he would remain open to amending the law if compelling evidence emerges.
Comments (11)
Add commentits in your vaccines, every flu shot has heavy metals
stop getting flu shots and watch your community beet this thing! it only makes sense to big pharma to get you sick and make a ton of money for the rest of that childs life! how do you create a slave and never let them know! take 30% of there money every check then get them sick and they spend the rest of there money fighting for there life!
@ Wakeup
You are entitled to your opinion, but I suggest that you look at the facts, rather than buy into the Jenny McCarthy- led anti-vaccine effort.
I've got a child with Autism, and while I'm no expert, I can say that the research and facts don't support vaccines being the cause of Autism. I wish I knew what does cause it, but I'm pretty sure vaccines are not the reason.
Requiring that insurers offer coverage to affected families and more research will help.
Think about this,
If a company is required by law to provide a service, and not funded, as legislators do. That by definition is an "Unfunded mandate" Well, somebody has to pony up the loot! Perhaps the mercury in shots has turned them all "Mad as a Hatter"?
State mandates are one aspect
State mandates are one aspect of healthcare insurance that drives up the cost for everyone.
This is another reason why consumers of healthcare should be allowed to shop across state lines for the policy that best fits their needs. And a reason why healthcare insurance should be unbridled from employers. Make it more like car insurance.
And, of course, Democrat Sen. Ellis can proclaim - "“the state has consistently adopted state-mandated coverage as part of its standard health plan for state employees", even though there was no requirement to do so." What does he care - it's not his money that's being spent for the most lavish plan available.
Good call on Parnell's part to let it become law without his signature, to whatever degree political posturing was involved . Atleast small businesses are exempt and the bill can be amended in the future.
Autism
No matter what the cause of Autism is, insurance companies need to help pay for the cost! Autism causes people to spend money out of pocket on medical care for the life of the person
billb,
Insurance companies don't pay for a dam thing, just as state government dosn't pay for a dam thing. I leave it up to your imagination to figure out where said revenue is derived from, ;-)
But bob, I'll bet billb voted
But bob, I'll bet billb voted in the last election, ya think?!!!
We have a new, politically correct name for voters like that - low information voters!
Calypso,
Is that low information or NO information? I can't understand a person with a lick of sense voting for obama? All one need do is look and you can see how bad he is for the country. What the US needs right now is a taste of "tough love" NO more spending without a means of repayment and I don't mean taxes that are unjust. A little common sense could go a long way right now, problem is the Republican's will probably cave and we will slide backwards even more. Freeze spending and dedicate a portion of each tax dollar to debt repayment. Give tax breaks to companys that expand or build in the US, NOT subsidies. And have some reasonable tarifs, not free trade. That would at least be a start!
Calypso & Akbob
Even though I wouldn't wish an autistic child on anyone, it is a shame that either of you don't have a sick child that will need medical attention for their entire life. You would then see what it costs out of pocket too pay for these services. I am sure you tune would change.
Calypso, it doesn't matter to whom I voted for in November. The will of the majority of the people in the country have spoken. Get over it! Instead of complaining about which party will, or hasn't done which things, realize that BOTH parties are at fault. WE need to fire them all and get ones that represent the will of the people NOT what they want themselves!
alaskabobc: Times are tough. Granted, the US debt is a grave
concern but it seems much easier to decry our national debt than it is to shed a tear for those most vulnerable. Good times will return. Be patient.
But let us not throw the patient out with the bathwater.
Please grant our nation the 'half-time' to return in the second half to win.
billb: good point. Without insurance coverage these families face incredible challenges. Though I feel there is something to be done regarding 'state lines'. The intention here is not to 'punish' or place undue expenses upon insurance companies. Is it true insurance companies are not allowed to cross state lines?
@ken - "Perhaps the most
@ken -
"Perhaps the most prominent conservative health care reform idea is to allow Americans to buy health insurance across state lines. It’s undoubtedly the GOP’s favorite talking point when it comes to replacing ObamaCare. Not only is it well-known, it’s also pretty popular. The benefits to such a reform are obvious, as any economist will tell you that more competition in a market typically leads to lower prices and higher product quality. It makes intuitive sense to most Americans, and there aren’t any exceedingly obvious reasons to object to the idea.
So, why hasn’t it passed through Congress? Why are interstate insurances sales still prohibited? It’s certainly within Congress’s constitutional power to remove these barriers to interstate commerce. Consider the relevant portion of the oft-abused commerce clause of the Constitution:
“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes…” - Article 1, Section 8
Removing barriers to interstate commerce was the primary purpose of the commerce clause, after all. Clearly, the sale of health insurance across state lines falls under regulating commerce “among the several States.” In 1944, the Supreme Court affirmed this view in United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association. So, there must be political or policy objections to the idea. What are they?
The main barrier to establishing the sale of health insurance across state lines is the lobbying of each state’s insurance commissioner. Simply put, their job is to regulate the sale of insurance in their state, including health insurance. In 39 states, the holder of this little-known bureaucratic office is appointed, and almost always by the state’s governor (with two exceptions: Virginia and New Mexico). The 11 states that elect their insurance commissioners are California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Washington."
Read more here -
http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/daniel-anderson/replacing-obamacare-ins...