Free Daily Headlines :

  • COVID-19
  • Vaccine Info
  • Money
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Justice
  • More
    • Environment
    • Economic Development
    • Gaming
    • Investigations
    • Social Services
    • TRANSPORTATION
  • Opinion
    • CT Viewpoints
    • CT Artpoints
DONATE
Reflecting Connecticut’s Reality.
    COVID-19
    Vaccine Info
    Money
    Politics
    Education
    Health
    Justice
    More
    Environment
    Economic Development
    Gaming
    Investigations
    Social Services
    TRANSPORTATION
    Opinion
    CT Viewpoints
    CT Artpoints

LET�S GET SOCIAL

Show your love for great stories and out standing journalism

Revised health care bill passes House, despite hospital opposition

  • Health
  • by Arielle Levin Becker
  • May 31, 2015
  • View as "Clean Read" "Exit Clean Read"
This is a picture of Rep. Prasad Srinivasan (left) and Rep. Matt Ritter, who worked to revise the bill.

Mark Pazniokas :: CTMirror.org

Rep. Prasad Srinivasan, left, and Rep. Matt Ritter, who worked to revise the bill.

The House of Representatives passed a wide-ranging, controversial health care bill Saturday night after scaling back certain provisions deemed particularly onerous by hospitals.

Many individual provisions of the 87-page proposal could have been controversial bills on their own; together, they represent a set of changes that could have significant ripples through major industries undergoing rapid change. Hospital officials have said they impose onerous new regulations and could make it harder for distressed hospitals to find purchasers to help them survive, while unions and advocacy groups say they could help rein in costs and protect patients.

The bill, which passed the House 98 to 43, now goes to the Senate, which passed an earlier version of the bill but must vote again since the proposal was revised.

The bill addresses many facets of health care. It would revise the approval process for the sale of hospitals and establish a statewide system for sharing patients’ medical records. It would require health care providers and insurers to make more information available about the cost and quality of care and insurance plan details, and would curtail certain hospital billing practices. It aims to unravel some of the advantages hospital chains can gain by acquiring physician practices, although the House bill eliminated some of the most controversial steps in that direction developed by the Senate.

The bill was the brainchild of the Senate’s top Democrat and Republican, inspired by their shared concerns about the growth of large health systems that control multiple hospitals and physician practices. When that chamber debated the proposal, Senate Minority Leader Len Fasano, R-North Haven, spoke critically of the Yale New Haven Health System as operating in a monopoly-like fashion, and warned that without action, patients would have fewer choices of health care providers.

The tone was markedly different in the House’s debate, where several members raised concerns about both the bill and broader state policy toward hospitals. Hospitals are now subject to a state tax and have faced cuts in state funding in recent years, while a separate bill this year would subject nonprofit hospitals to property taxes on new off-campus facilities.

“It’s one more slam on our hospitals,” Rep. Terrie Wood, R-Darien, said of the bill.

Rep. Dan Carter, R-Bethel, took issue with criticism of the Yale New Haven Health System, which he said many people would turn to for care if a family member were sick. Carter said the bill seemed to be saying that Yale has gotten too big, and the state should stand in its way.

Public Health Committee Chairman Rep. Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, who worked to revise the bill, defended the measure, saying Senate leaders had “put some things in place here that I believe you’re all going to hear about for years to come, as a moment when Connecticut made changes to make our health care system more consumer-friendly, to bring down costs, to help doctors.”

“And at the same time, you might have a few people say that there were a few sections that, ‘eh, I see a different way,’” he added, noting that hospitals maintained their opposition to the bill.

But Ritter said he believed the revised version was an improvement, and a compromise.

Rep. Prasad Srinivasan, R-Glastonbury, the top GOP House member on the Public Health Committee and the only physician in the legislature, said the bill would have “a significant impact on the landscape of health care for our state.” While not perfect, he said, it was “something we can definitely live with because it has a lot of good values.”

Rep. Jason Perillo, R-Shelton, said he “abhorred” the original version of the bill, but planned to vote for it because of how it was revised. “We are much better off today than we were a month ago, two months ago, 12 hours ago,” he said.

New rules for sale of hospitals
Waterbury Hospital

Erin Covey :: Waterbury Republican American

Waterbury Hospital

Among the most controversial parts of the bill are changes to the approval process for the sale of hospitals. Many of the state’s independent hospitals have been looking into partnering with larger networks as a way to survive in a health care landscape viewed as increasingly favoring larger organizations.

Plans by the national for-profit chain Tenet Healthcare to purchase five Connecticut hospitals fell through last year after the state regulator, the Office of Health Care Access, indicated it would impose conditions that the company deemed too burdensome. Since then, the regulatory process has come under scrutiny.

The bill would impose new requirements for that process – some of which critics noted were similar to the conditions that caused Tenet to walk away.

The bill would charge the Office of Health Care Access with considering, among other factors, whether a proposed hospital sale could reduce competition and raise prices. Potential hospital purchasers would have to submit a plan showing how services would be expected to change in the next three years.

But the regulator would also have to consider the burden of any conditions it imposes, and would have to show the legal and factual basis for them.

Any hospital sales involving for-profit companies or large hospitals or hospital systems would be subject to additional scrutiny. Those sales would have to go through a cost and market-impact review, and the state attorney general could take further action if the review determines that the transaction is likely to lead to an organization with a dominant market share or prices that are “materially higher” than the rest of the market. If the sale is approved, the purchaser would have to pay for an independent monitor to track compliance with any conditions set for the transaction.

Hospitals that begin the application process for a sale before Dec. 1 would not be subject to the new requirements, which could allow Waterbury Hospital – which is in talks with its third potential purchaser in recent years – to avoid the new rules.

Some critics of the requirements argued that they could make it harder for financially struggling hospitals to find buyers willing to purchase them.

Ritter defended the change, saying that it was a choice between giving the Office of Health Care Access a blank canvas or giving the regulator more guidance – which he said would provide more consistency for hospitals.

“If we find out that distressed hospitals cannot be purchased because of this, which I do not believe will happen, I’ve got a feeling a lot of you will come talk to your colleagues and say we have to look at that,” he said.

Changes from Senate version

The bill includes several provisions aimed at improving transparency in health care costs and quality, calling for the state’s health insurance exchange to create a website that people can use to compare the price of care, and requiring hospitals to provide information about the cost and quality of care to patients who request it. That requirement was scaled back from the Senate version, which would have required hospitals and outpatient surgical centers to provide notification whether patients ask for it or not. Insurers would also be required to provide more information about the cost of care and what benefits and prescription drugs their plans cover.

Patients would receive more notice about facility fees – additional charges they can face for getting care at outpatient facilities owned by hospitals. And facilities fees on some types of care would be banned starting in 2017.

The version that passed the House eliminated two major concerns of hospitals – a requirement that hospitals owned by the same company negotiate insurance contracts separately if the insurer requested, and a provision that would have required insurers to pay community physicians the same rate whether their practice is owned by a hospital or not.

Ritter said two additions to the bill – policy changes sought by hospitals and suggested by Republicans – helped the deal come together Saturday. One would allow hospital systems to file audited financial statements for the entire organization, rather than for each hospital individually, which Ritter said could save the Yale system nearly $1 million and Hartford HealthCare $2 million per year. The other would remove the requirement that hospitals get state approval to replace certain imaging equipment like MRI scanners.

Sign up for CT Mirror's free daily news summary.

Free to Read. Not Free to Produce.

The Connecticut Mirror is a nonprofit newsroom. 90% of our revenue comes from people like you. If you value our reporting please consider making a donation. You'll enjoy reading CT Mirror even more knowing you helped make it happen.

YES, I'LL DONATE TODAY

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Arielle Levin Becker Arielle Levin Becker covers health care for The Connecticut Mirror. She previously worked for The Hartford Courant, most recently as its health reporter, and has also covered small towns, courts and education in Connecticut and New Jersey. She was a finalist in 2009 for the prestigious Livingston Award for Young Journalists and a recipient of a Knight Science Journalism Fellowship and the National Health Journalism Fellowship. She is a graduate of Yale University.

SEE WHAT READERS SAID

RELATED STORIES
Rep. Patricia Billie Miller wins vacant Senate seat
by Mark Pazniokas

Rep. Patricia Billie Miller, D-Stamford, won a special election to the state Senate.

Final passage of ‘Crown Act’ comes on unanimous vote
by Mark Pazniokas

With a unanimous vote, Connecticut became the latest state to adopt legislation prohibiting discrimination based on hairstyles associated with race.

Senate confirms Miguel Cardona as U.S. Secretary of Education
by Adria Watson

Cardona was the youngest principal in the state of Connecticut.

Nora Dannehy named top legal aide to Lamont
by Mark Pazniokas

The hiring of Nora Dannehy brings a high-profile legal talent into Lamont's office at the mid-point of his four-year term.

Medical providers are taking nature therapy seriously
by Jenifer Frank | C-HIT.ORG

In a time of social isolation and staying home, sometimes a walk in the park is the best medicine.

Support Our Work

Show your love for great stories and outstanding journalism.

$
Select One
  • Monthly
  • Yearly
  • Once
Artpoint painter
CT ViewpointsCT Artpoints
Opinion Fitness is part of Connecticut’s COVID solution
by David Humphrey

Based on what we now know about infection rates and transmission, it is more apparent than ever before that gyms, fitness centers, and the physical and mental health benefits of exercise are essential to help our state get through the months ahead.

Opinion Connecticut can’t afford state government-run health insurance
by Mike Licamele

As much as I support strengthening and improving healthcare, I do not believe SB 842 is the way to do that. Instead of trying to force Connecticut residents into a new, government-controlled healthcare system, lawmakers should focus on improving our existing one by building on what’s working and continuing to address lowering costs, not raising taxes

Opinion Disabled, marginalized, stalled and walled
by Doris Maldonado

As a bilingual health information specialist for PATH P2P Family Voices CT and National Family Voices Cultural Responsiveness Telehealth Team, I offer more than professional expertise as well as despair for the marginalized within marginalized communities. I am a Latina with disabilities, adoptive mother of 17-year-old twins with special needs and a thriving toddler.

Opinion The marijuana legalization debate must be based on facts
by Will Jones III

In response to my earlier piece on why Connecticut lawmakers should reject marijuana commercialization,  Brendan Ruberry wrote a rebuttal that, on its face seems scathing, but to be clear, the attempted rebuttal falls flat and well off the mark.

Artwork Grand guidance
by Anne:Gogh

In a world of systemic oppression aimed towards those of darker skintones – representation matters. We are more than our equity elusive environments, more than numbers in a prison and much more than victims of societal dispositions. This piece depicts a melanated young man draped in a cape ascending high above multiple forms of oppression. […]

Artwork Shea
by Anthony Valentine

Shea is a story about race and social inequalities that plague America. It is a narrative that prompts the question, “Do you know what it’s like to wake up in new skin?”

Artwork The Declaration of Human Rights
by Andres Chaparro

Through my artwork I strive to create an example of ideas that reflect my desire to raise social consciousness, and cultural awareness. Jazz music is the catalyst to all my work, and plays a major influence in each piece of work.”

Artwork ‘A thing of beauty. Destroy it forever’
by Richard DiCarlo | Derby

During times like these it’s often fun to revisit something familiar and approach things with a different slant. I have been taking some Pop culture and Art masterpieces and applying the vintage 1960’s and 70’s classic figures (Fisher Price, little people) to the make an amusing pieces. Here is my homage to Fisher -Price, Yellow […]

Twitter Feed
A Twitter List by CTMirror

Engage

  • Reflections Tickets & Sponsorships
  • Events
  • Donate
  • Newsletter Sign-Up
  • Submit to Viewpoints
  • Submit to ArtPoints
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Commenting Guidelines
  • Legal Notices
  • Contact Us

About

  • About CT Mirror
  • Announcements
  • Board
  • Staff
  • Sponsors and Funders
  • Donors
  • Friends of CT Mirror
  • History
  • Financial
  • Policies
  • Strategic Plan

Opportunity

  • Advertising and Sponsorship
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Use of Photography
  • Work for Us

Go Deeper

  • Steady Habits Podcast
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Five Things

The Connecticut News Project, Inc. 1049 Asylum Avenue, Hartford, CT 06105. Phone: 860-218-6380

© Copyright 2021, The Connecticut News Project. All Rights Reserved. Website by Web Publisher PRO