HCS HB 1440 -- HEALTH INSURANCE

SPONSOR:  Harlan (Riback Wilson, 25)

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Committee on Critical
Issues, Consumer Protection and Housing by a vote of 14 to 3.

Under current law, there are several exceptions to the
requirement that health insurers who cover services for mental
illness and addictive disorders provide the same coverage as they
do for physical illness.  These include exceptions that allow
insurers to limit inpatient hospital treatment for mental illness
to 90 days per year (Section 376.811, RSMo), place annual and
lifetime limits on alcohol and drug abuse treatment services
(Section 376.827), and exclude or apply different limits to
certain specified services (Section 376.833).

This substitute repeals the current law and requires health
carriers that offer health benefit plans in this state on or
after January 1, 2003, to provide coverage for mental health
conditions.  Mental health conditions are defined as those listed
in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders.  Coverage for mental health
conditions cannot have rates, terms, or conditions that place a
greater financial burden on an insured for mental health
treatment than for physical health treatment.

The substitute does not apply to supplemental insurance policies.

FISCAL NOTE:  Estimated Net Income to Insurance Dedicated Fund of
$9,850 in FY 2003, $0 in FY 2004, $0 in FY 2005.  Estimated Net
Cost to Conservation Fund of Unknown in FY 2003, FY 2004, and FY
2005.  Estimated Net Cost to Highway Fund of $213,139 to $426,276
in FY 2003, $255,766 to $517,532 in FY 2004, and $255,766 to
$517,532 in FY 2005.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that the bill represents fairness by
providing health insurance parity for mental illness and chemical
dependency.  Due to scientific advances, mental illnesses are
identifiable, definable, and treatable just like physical
illnesses.  Early intervention is crucial in treating mental
illness and chemical dependency and reduces costs by avoiding
hospitalization or other expensive treatments that may be
required for advanced illness.  With treatment, persons with
mental illness and chemical dependency can remain productive
members of society.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Riback Wilson (25);
Mental Health Commission; Department of Mental Health; Eastern
Missouri Psychiatric Society; University of Missouri Health Care;
National Association of Social Workers; National Alliance for the
Mentally Ill; Social Concerns - Diocese of Jefferson City;
University of Missouri School of Health Professionals; Missouri
Recovery Network Advocacy; Missouri Association for Social
Welfare; Service Employees International Union Local 2000;
AFSCME; Missouri Coalition of Community Mental Health Centers;
and Missouri Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bill say that the bill will
cause the cost of health insurance to increase and might result
in smaller employers dropping insurance coverage for their
employees, causing fewer people to be insured.  Opponents also
object to a mandate to provide this coverage and are concerned
that medical and surgical benefits will be reduced as a result of
the bill.  Opponents feel that much thought and effort went into
the existing law and that the current law is satisfactory.

Testifying against the bill were Missouri Association of Health
Plans; Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Missouri; United Health Care;
St. Louis Area Health Business Coalition; Associated Industries
of Missouri; and Missouri Chamber of Commerce.

Dana Estes, Legislative Analyst

Missouri House of Representatives
Last Updated October 11, 2002 at 9:01 am