Saying they want to help policyholders who’ve faced skyrocketing rates on long-term care insurance plans, senators on Thursday voted overwhelmingly to advance a bill that imposes consumer safeguards and requires greater financial transparency from insurance companies.

Sen. Matthew Lesser, D-Middletown, a key backer of the measure, said the proposal is meant to “provide regulators more tools to curtail potential increases and give more data about what is driving those rate increases” while offering protections directly to consumers.

“This is a step forward that will hopefully provide some compensation, some sign to the people of this state that we care about this issue, that we are aware the market has failed the people who purchased these policies,” he said Thursday.

The bill passed the Senate 35 to 1. Sen. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, was the lone dissenter.

The proposal would require insurers to file annual reports with the state on incurred and actual paid losses for LTCI policies issued in Connecticut. The state insurance commissioner and head of the Office of Policy and Management must share the information with legislators and post it on their departments’ websites.

[Priced Out: An industry at the intersection of elder care and insurance is in turmoil]

The bill also directs the insurance commissioner to study the effects of a proposal allowing policyholders to cancel their plans and obtain full refunds for premiums paid since the start of the coverage whenever an insurer files for rate hikes that exceed the rate of inflation. It also asks the commissioner to review the impact of the reinsurance market on the availability of long-term care insurance policies.

The measure also gives the state attorney general the power to investigate insurance companies for practices or patterns that violate state law.

“Long-term care insurance products are broken. It has become so expensive,” said Sen. Jason Perillo, R-Shelton, adding that the bill is “a very good example of how we can work together in a bipartisan way.”

Nearly 100,000 people in Connecticut have long-term care insurance — coverage that, depending on the policy, supports skilled in-home care, rehabilitation therapy, assisted living, nursing home stays and respite care.

A CT Mirror investigation last year found that the annual cost of maintaining long-term care coverage has skyrocketed for many residents due to miscalculations by insurers on how long people would live, the price of care and how many would need it. Policyholders complained of dramatic rate increases, often exceeding 50% and, for a few dozen people, as high as 174%, according to a CT Mirror analysis.

The CT Mirror’s review of rate hikes from January 2019 to October 2024 showed that more than 17,000 people with long-term care policies were had been hit with increases of 50% or more. Some of the biggest companies in the market, including Genworth Financial, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Transamerica Life Insurance Company, requested hikes for five years in a row beginning in 2019.

When large providers seek premium increases, thousands of consumers can be affected. In 2019, for example, Genworth Financial requested a 40% rate hike on more than 9,000 Connecticut policyholders. In 2021, Transamerica requested a 20% rate increase on 8,000 policies. The insurance department approved both requests with no changes.

In 2022, Genworth raised rates for more than 2,000 people by an average of 97%, with increases ranging from 79% to 173%, depending on the policy. The approved amounts were a slight reduction from the company’s original request.

Hwang, R-Fairfield, said Thursday he was concerned that the study of a policy allowing refunds would be “opening up Pandora’s box.”

“There could potentially be a floodgate of applicants [to such a program] … and a run on companies,” he said. “We could do a study, and I would encourage that we do a fiscal note on this.”

Still, he added: “Long-term care insurance has been a critical issue that has impacted our constituency.

“I want to compliment the Human Services Committee for … proposing this amended bill to address a concern that has been so powerfully impactful for many of our residents.”

The measure now heads to the House.